Biblical Archa on theAncientWorldfromMesopotamia to the Mediterranean Perspectives
i~Br~~i~il ...>3:...
(.
•..~~n~ 4
•er•;b•2
.
:
Vol.57 No.1
March1994
Biblical Archaeolo to theMediterranean on theAncientWorldfromMesopotamia Perspectives A Publication oftheAmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch
2
Volume57 Number1 March1994
PhoenicianInscriptions
Donald R. Vance
20
civilizationwould hardlybe the samewithoutthe monMediterranean of the Phoenicians. contributions umental Amongtheirlegacyarethouin ceramics,inscribedon in of scratched sands inscriptions--carved stone, detailthe culture with These and ink. records and metal penned ivory, and historyof theirrenownedLevantinecities--Byblos,Sidon,Tyre,and art,religion, others--fromwhichPhcenicianinfluenceon Mediterranean and commercespread. The "Libation Installations" of the Tombs at Ugarit Wayne T Pitard
Did the ancientSyrianinhabitantsof Ugarit"feed"theirdead afterinterment?Oversix decadesafterClaudeSchaefferbeganhis grandexcavaof its tionsof thisLateBronzeAge metropolisandport,his interpretations and otherfuneraryaccoutombscontinueto offer"libationinstallations" datano longersupport trementsto the unwary.Butthe archaeological Schaeffer's suppositionsregardingan activecultof thedead.It'stimeto lay the funeraryinstallationsat Ugaritto rest.
page 2
38
A Medieval Church in Mesopotamia Michael and Neathery Fuller
of a SyrianChristianchurchsurprisedthe Theunmistakablearchitecture a siteof manyruinsin northeastern excavatorsof Tuneinir, Syria.Finds floor and on the a bread mold church's stains produced plaster including by drippingchandeliersre-animatethelifeof thismedievalplaceof worship.Paintedplasterlintelsrecapturethecolorandbeautyof thisuncommon mud-brickchurch.
page 20
46
The Minoan Origin of Tyrian Purple RobertR. Stieglitz
Tyrianpurplewas the mostexpensivedye in the ancientworld.Manuof speciesof theMediterranean facturedfromthesecretions molluskMurex, of "royalpurple"arecommonlycreditedto thediscoveryanddistribution and epigraphicdatafromthe Aegean the Phoenicians. Yetarchaeological the that suggest "royalpurple"industryfirstdevelopedon Crete.Before Minoanson CreteandsomeMinoanizedislanders,suchas those 1750BCE, anindustry on Kythera,werealreadymanufacturing sea-purple, generating thatthencaughton andprosperedthroughoutthe easternMediterranean. News, Notes, and Reviews 55 Papyrus Scrollsfrom Petra:A StupendousDiscovery. A cache of scrolls-
page 38
flattenedand carbonized,but readable-has emergedfromthe Byzantine Churchat Petra.ACORis spearheadinga monumentaleffortto preserve thispricelesspapyruslegacy.
On the cover: The bust of late tenth century PharaohOsorkon I shoulders a Phoencianinscriptionof Elibaal,king of Byblos (@ Photo R.M.N.).In the background are drawings of the carved letters of the Phoencianalphabet from the fifth century sarcophagus of Sidon's king Eshmunazar.
FromtheEditor pigraphic finds-from ostraca to monumental even inscriptions-exhilarate E the richest of archaeological projects. BA takes great delight in offering a first glimpse at the stupendous discovery at Petra of a cache of damaged but readable papyrus scrolls. This find caps the remarkable excavation of a Byzantine basilica and its breathtakingmosaics. Legible scroll fragments have already suggested ties to known history. When finally unwrapped, the mass of documents will doubtless permit a glimpse into Petra's heretofore hidden Byzantine social and economic history, and the sandstone city will be heralded for yet more than its spectacular cinnamon facades. The cursive Greek of the Petra papyri owes its existence to the alphabetic tradition preserved in the simplified linear writing of Phcenician inscriptions. Scattered by the spread of the Phcenician cities' seafaring cultures across a millennium and from one shore of the Mediterranean to the other, these inscriptions offer a primary historical record. Donald Vance explores this record in the first half of his discerning inventory of Phcenician inscriptions. This issue's offering focuses on contemporary work on inscriptions found in Phoenicia proper. The second half of Vance's presentation of this inscriptional legacy will embrace finds from the remainder of the vast Mediterranean basin. Vance's survey adds an installment to BA'songoing interest in the Literary Sources for the History of Palestine and Syria. Under the general editorship of University of Chicago Assyriologist Dennis Pardee, this decade-long series has ranged from the Ebla Tablets to Old Aramaic Inscriptions. Besides their role in the origin of the Greek and, thus, the modern western alphabet, the Phoenicians are customarily credited with discovering the purple dye for which their region was justly famous throughout the first millennium. But did they? Robert Stieglitz assembles archaeological and epigraphic data that challenge this item on the Phcenician resum6. Though the acclaim for the Phcenicians dates back to the Roman era, it is the Minoans who deserve recognition as the originators of 'royal purple'. Another challenge to a long-tenured archaeological interpretation focuses attention north of the Phceniciancoastal cites to the town and port of Ras Shamra (Ugarit) and into the enigmatic world of funerary ritual. Reconstruction of the burial practicesof Ugarit has long included the component of post-burial"feeding of the dead," based upon the initial archaeological interpretations of the site's excavator, Claude Schaeffer. Under the scrutiny of Wayne Pitard's re-analysis, the libation installations, altars, and ceiling holes for offerings of Schaeffer's imagination tuhnout to be latrines,gutters, and products of the intrusion of grave robbers. Overturning this evidence for post-funeral care of the deceased has crucial consequences for the interpretation of other excavated tombs as well as both Ugaritic and biblical literary data on beliefs about the dead. Distant from the Mediterranean site of Ugarit near the eastern edge of Syria, TellTuneiniroffers a beautifully preserved mudbrick church of medieval Syriacspeaking Christianity. Unexpectedly unearthed by Michael and Neathery Fuller, the site's architectureand small finds-painted plaster,a bread mold, an inscribed brick--wonderfully re-animate the life of this simple holy place. The excavators of Tell Tuneinir discovered a sanctuary where they had every reason to suspect fortifications. Their surprise joins the other revelations, fresh readings, and new proposals in this issue to remind one how quickly and unpredictably even the ancient world changes.
Biblical
Archaeologist
on theAncientWorldfrom Perspectives Mesopotamia to theMediterranean
Editor David C. Hopkins Art Director Robert D. Mench, Top Design Book Review Editor James C. Moyer Editorial Assistant Timothy L. Adamson Editorial Committee Gloria London Jeffery A. Blakely Ernest S. Frerichs Jodi Magness Gerald L. Mattingly Ronald S. Hendel Richard S. Hess Gaetano Palumbo Kenneth G. Hoglund Paul Zimansky Subscriptions Annual subscription rates are 535 for individuals and $45 for institutions. There is a special annual rate of $28 for those over 65, physically challenged, or unemployed. is also available as part of Biblical Archacolo•gist the benefits of some ASOR membership categories. Postage for Canadian and other international addresses is an additional $5. I'avments should be sent to ASOR Membership/ Subscriber Services, P.O. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 30333-0399 (ph: 404-727-2345; Bitnet: SCHOLARS@EMORYUI).VISA/Mastercard orders can be phoned in. Back issues Back issues can be obtained by calling SP Customer Services at 800-437-6692 or writing SP Customer Services, P.O. Box 6996, Alpharetta, GA 30239-6996. Postmaster Send address changes to Biblical Archaeologist,ASOR Membership/Subscriber Services, P.O.Box 15399,Atlanta, GA 30333-0399. Second-class postage paid at Atlanta, GA and additional offices. Copyright ? 1994 by the American Schools of Oriental Research. Correspondence All editorial correspondence should be addressed to BiblicalArclhaeologist, 4500 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016-5690 (ph: 202-885-8699; fax: 202-8858605). Books for review should be sent to Dr. James C. Moyer, Department of Religious Studies, Southwest Missouri State University, 901 South National, Box 167, Springfield, MO 65804-0095. Advertising Correspondence should be addressed to Sarah Foster, Scholars Press, P0. Box 15399, Atlanta, GA 30333-0399 (ph: 404727-2325; fax: 404-727-2348). Ads for the sale of antiquities will not be accepted. is published Bibrlical Archalriogist(ISSN()h006-0)895) quarterly(March,lune, September,December) by Scholars I'rets,819 Houston Mill Road NE, Atlanta,GA 30329, for the AmericanSchools of Oriental lesearch (ASOR),3301 North Charles Street,Bnaltimore,MD 21218. l'rinted by Cadmus Journal Services, Balti more MD.
NISOF0P
r
JV/to
AwLv~
H#oic'
:7 : i,::•,:!
. ?1 ': :i!:•:•'• -:,.•:-;•... .... , •:' o'•,;• ,:
•• -
-•,
; :I~: ?::i :~j;~~ -:ic:i:•
:.: :.:-': ••.:•i!
• ::::!:!
:,?gt•9~:i'?:;: ::•::::-:i:~
for the of Palestine and Syria: History The Phlinician Inscriptions,
-41
:
• :ii""i;:;:-:::-: -!i.•
H....: !.': :
- i•::.;:
-.;.. : • :•:••: :-:':•::i: ::"•::•';•
::•:
•
•
Literary Sources
Part
':
:
:?:.
low,
Il
Vance
ByDonald R. Vance
>44
Now
Hiram,kingofTyre,sent
messengers to David, as well as cedar logs, carpenters,and stonemasons, and they built a palace for David." (2 Sam 5:11) "Departingfrom there, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyreand Sidon." (Matt 15:21) These two verses from the Biblebear witness to a relationshipbetween Phoenicia and Israel that spanned at least a millennium. Phoeniciancities interacted with nations other than Israel,of course. The twelfth-dynasty Egyptian story of Sinuhetells how this attendantfled Egypt on the death of his king, Amenemhet I and made his way to (1991-1962 BCE), Byblos (ANET:18-22).1The Amamrna have profuse letters (14th century BCE) referencesto the Phoeniciancities of Tyre, Sidon, and Byblos;indeed, seventy-three of the letterswere written eitherfrom or to Byblos (Gubla in the texts) alone. It is recorded in an inventory tabletfound at the Mesopotamian city of Mari, that Zimri-Lim(1810-1796BCE), king of Mari, received a gold vase from Yantinhamu, king of Byblos (Albright 1945). During the period of the Persian Empire, Darius I and Xerxes used the ships of Tyre and Sidon against the Greeks. Persian control of these cities later gave way to that of Greece with the conquest by Alexander in 333 BCE. Greciancontact with Phoeniciancities is attested as
2
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
early as Homer (11.23.744-745and see Muhly 1970).The Phoenicianemporia extended across North Africa and up into Spain.2One of these emporia,Carthage, was the majorpower in the Mediterraneanuntil its defeat by Rome in 146 BCE. The most importantcontributionof the Phoeniciansto the history of the Ancient Near East was the alphabet. The r6le that the Phoeniciansplayed in the developmentof the alphabetis complex.3 According to Herodotus:
t~~i~i!i~iil• • *•l
,.
:?9"1 "
.
n4"
The Phoenicians...introducedinto Greece, after their settlement in the country,a number of accomplishments, of which the most important was the alphabet, which till then, I think, had been unknown to the Greeks [Hist. V:58].4
4
(4
...
. ..
-4'. . .
The Greeks used some of the signs which stood for consonants found in Phoenicianbut not in Greek to represent the vowels, signs for which were absent from the Phoenicianalphabet (Naveh 1982:vii).ThisGreekalphabetwas in turn
.
Theancient site of Byblostoday. Archaeology in much of Lebanonis hinderedby the richnessof the Greco-Roman remainswhich deserve,certainly,to be preserved,but which lie on top of the earliermaterial.Photographby of Darel-Machreq Publishers. permission
..'
....
....
/:4-i!/:;: . .
.
.
.
. . ...-.% ....:.. .. ...... . . .. . . .. . ....-. .. . .. . .. . .. .:. . ... ..... ........... . .. .. .................. .. ... ?.........:-...1%. ..... .......:.....,. . . . .el. . .:.:: .......,........::..............?? . . ........ ... . .. .. . . ...... . . .. ............. ......-.. ..:... .:.:.. ..:. . . .. ..:?.. . ... ............ :.: . . . ........... ..... ....... - .. ....... ....... .. .% . .. . ... . . . . . . .%. :, .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .: . . .. . .. . . . : . . . . ?% ,_ .. :: ? . .: : . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ..:% ...::: %.,. .. . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . ... .. .. . . . ..,. ..,... . ..... ..I...... ....... . ..,...... .. ... ."I. ?..:,...%. . ... .? . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . ....,:.... .. . .... . ...A ..,--. .... .. . . .... . .,??t ....., :: I..,...:.:-. :: . . .1..1 . ....,.. ?...-?J, ,-?,. -?..,d,,I.??.. . . ..--,:-, . ? . .... . 10.10 . .. ..I:,;-, .. 170 el . . . . I . .1 .. . .. ,,W ?. ?,?.,? .... ,?,. . .?;.... %. . 1111.1.1i . -.,.,-,?:.. ".?? . ,,??A ."... .... ...',M-,? .. ...?:, A-11 . . .. ... .-" .. .....,41"O .. . . ,.......:,.. -.-,?. .,.... ..,% . I.? ?11, , I. ... . . . .... . .. %.. . * . . .1 , * . . . . ....,.: ., ...?, ....... ?, .I:i-,e ,,.,..,-.?? .. ... . -.,..... . .............-.. .. IIN? ,.S, .. .. .. , .. . . ?-?:, ?...... .%:.. . . t. .-.. . . ,,?: IL.. .. . .. .%? . . . : ...., . . ..: .. m M.X kf . .1. . .; . . .. ,,? fidkoin -.-.,..? ...,:. . . -... ........ ., .4, .: . ......-.. -. ....4 I.. .% . . .. ...-._. %? ... .:..:.... ,..... ..... . .% .: ;? ?.:: . ..... . . . . ...m ...,..,: ..,?? ..... .? ?. .,A ,.'T -.? -1 ....:% -. 4.ct,,;A ....... .. . .... ....... ....% ........ .-, .k. .... ......% ..-, .....?i. ..... . I... -11 ,%.% ?11%.:. %; %.. ?-...,. ...... ". .... .... ,... -..:: ke ". .%. .:: .%?: :N ...,.,., ...:: ..??-v *-??, . .. . . :?: .:?. . .... .... , % ... . ..... I A.. . :: .. :111, ... ... m %..:. % .11:1 --.-.. .1, ?? % .... " .I-l.. %. . . % . " ,:, .:%. ... % : ? .. . .% ? ... I,.?ffi ..,..... .?. ... ...::.-lim ..?.Iw .. , -%. ?? ...... .1 . . ...: . ..... ..... :e..-.,-..:%? -,.;-.,.-?.,_ %. -..... ..... .;? .. .... .. ..-,1.-M ..% ?,. % -K .--?::%:..:: R ,l -m??, .??%-e .. ?::.::%: %, .........r? W 1,11M -..%, 1%. M, .
I. .
,,L ?? -..%.:. -",:.??,-%.;,?-?,??. ..:.IOOAWW -I-....-'::...lw k .",C?; :.., -,,,??,::,%?,`?,,..,.:.:., - "......-,l-,-.W ..... I.,....:.. ,%1,1 ,..?, -, ..,:...... IN %?,?,,.` ?, ,ll.? ?I..%.. ..??...... .": ..,?. ,%:? ?..;.,S... ,"I ?? .: % I,?.: ,I,,?,,,.: ... ....:%?*,%: ..::.1?:??,44" k Ie:...'; -;l:... .: ... % %?114 ,... -1. ?-,,., ?0,0 I%, ?,,? ?,...:?,. ?::??,? ?,%,:?:.? ..:::?. ,,--,."" ...?: ,::: .1. . %.. :?? . :.... . . ,% ..-.-, ;%?...?? w ?:... -?.;: . ::::::.:::: .... .....1....;? ?::,:? , ,?r -w ?,,4 -?7? . ?,:l . . ... -,g Nl?,. ..... I?, ."?,2,4 , . .. ... . . .: .. ...-.........% .11 -,... ?. .. :::::?. ......??,,,I-M .?:.?:.. .?K ? , . . .... I.,I., .:.:. ........, . . I...", ?....?J..,:?? . ..??,:.. .-:I... I., .... . .. ... . , I... . :........... ".. 4 .... ,'. ?1'.... ..:.,:.?. ._: ., 1? * %%.'.:".. k...??i.... :? .% ? ...::% -.I .. . ::,:.::..% t .. ? . ...... ......... . :.... ,?! : ..: .. . .a? .?., . xv .1 . . : . %?? . . : ?...: ???, .?. -1-? .. . ?... .. . .. 4, ' ... . . It. ?, ?:L % ; % ,,,? . -I... . .. :,::?fl ? . . .. .... . . . :. 1 ' %. . I .;, .c:, ,. . .., , , ... ?4. 0 . .. . e?, . ? ,. ?. .. . . .: :% .%,-:%. ..,:.. ---1-:, .? . . ? .:.... .... -. . .. %. 1. . . v ," ....... % .. .. : . .11 .. . . , ?! . . .... ?:,,.-??,,%,V.,,.. ,? ::: I e ,. ... .I.,.. .... .........,?. ?. .: :::.. .. . . .. . ,'.:, : . -.%-?-". :-.? ,.. ..........e... ? . .? % ?%.. .. . ? . . ...... ,,,,..!.: O.; . .-. ... :% . .. . I . . .... z,? -,,,*6,, ... ?--:,. 1-, ?,-,..V?Vft i........ Al" Il 11C. . . , " ... .... ...... ... , " I -W .. . N n M ,, . ..... ? ,ow 1, . % ? .. w fw .:..... . ..:: I...-..:.,-,.?? ''. ...?" 'k .-i,%. ..... -?? -%.,??-%. %i?,%;?-,o Yli,,?,,, ,IA -,?. -:??..?.:. .:..... ,,.,...--.". ... ?, .% ..... ... ,%.: .%??-..... .. ...... .-e..: ...: ..7 ..", -...:. %, . V.: % ,?..??.......... ..2 ?...... ... ?.,?, 11 .:1 ..:.?.:?.:.;-Iv ....... ,,I.. .......... .. . ....:.... IT .i...... .11. "4w ....., .,%.. . -%* ...., ?, .:k ?,w.-.---..--g,4r. ....... ,.:. -.%* A . ........., : ??:% . IW I-11 .... .... . 7 .. ?,:. . ? 0 w .I.;%:%.. .. o ?% p..W ..I..... . .. ". .. ?-, ..I.... . . . ....... . .......... -1A ?,?.. . ...... ? . i ,.-??* . ... .... ... ..:... -? ??.. :?,-1?4%: .: .... ,.-- ... ,,,"I' % : ? .. .. -.... ..'. ::: ,?i -1. .::.. -?R-W .. ...... .. : . .%% : . .... .. . ? . . :.-?:?.,= . I .. : .: . . ,,l.,,-..?l-.,. . . . --* ]?, :% . ... .. . .e ,,,?-;% ..:w . .. . r .1 ... ..:, -'......, . . . :% .,...,...Ae. -,.I -v . e. . . ,?, . g..., ... . , ?.. , :....,., , -? . " .1 .:. ,???-?:, .. e t'. ... w % . ..l. ,--::, t 4?-, .. .. ...:?: .?,.* % .? . . . ? 14 '... :.,...: . . ,.? .??, :. ? ?: .%::I?ll ? -? . :::?.?? .. ..?<.. , , .. . -1 %,..e..:_.?:. .ell.... ... . ..% . ,. ... . . . ,??11 . .? `? ,A,.?-, ... .. . -W 11 : M . ... ., .1 ? .? w ... . .4, .... ?, t!:,.........'. -?..., ??:, .. . . . ... ..,.-; . ... ?-,-----.. % , % :4 . . W ,%:%? ,:, .. . 4,-...:..l,-I . .-,,. 1. ..... A .. . ,.:,? , : , --, Ad . .. ...:.. N., ?_U ? ... . ??.,,. ?. . . . . . .. .. . ?, ? ?,,q* I % % .'.. , "'?? .,?w ... -.-? ?? .. ,%. .. .?.%...,., ?W M ., -..... .-.-:. ..... -.?-.-,?.. %.:, 4 .... ..a I.I .:.?? Ow I .... %.. .. . ... ., . . :: .: , .. . :.,.,-,,. ek ...... .: . :%,?. ,-.11. --?F. ?.,.... -%.. ...:I,-?,. ?..... -.-k .I.. 1- ll??? -. ??... ?."% ... ?I%.:-%..%l.l.%* -.?.:,::: -: ?... ....??-,M..,, F ... ..;I.IV %a )%. :? .?? .;,,...*,** :. % ...---,?Ll ... ...... ........ -,,? .... A, .--&g? ....I,lk ...:::%: -6,::?? :.I.:.... ,-?9. ....., --*? ??.:-N ...:.%%: ..:..... ....... .* .-:% "', ?.,?_ ??:c?-. . . : :..... . .... A?. ? . 6 ... . . . . ,?? . .1 , . ?, :? ?,, I .. ...... . . e,?,. . .,%::... "'. .. .,,-'.'-,!" .. : . ... :%% ..?? . . . . , . . .. .::: ... . ....... . :! ... . e. 1 ?: .. . ?10?? * . . 1% ... %. ::: : ,7 : ::: : ?? K, . %... ., . . . . . , .e. ..% ?? .:: % . . . .. . .. . .. ?%: : . . . . . . ? .. : .. .. , ,.?7 ,..-.,%?, ?:: :.%,., .? . : ... . ? ,. .. . .... . %.:" % .. ..... 1. ?,-.?%,.T ^ ;.:? .:.. . ... .. . .:, . . ... ..WA, . . I... . , . .... .. .. ?5-: % . ?.::..-...... .. . . . ..- . .,.11 ?. -.1 ?,.. -?, ?-, .. -.1 - .:-: .. mw .. ......:....,%% -, ... . . ...,:. .,-%%. . .-?? .... .. .e.l... .... .... ..;%... .. ...:?:? .e,:oo,,.? %..:. ::.
: . ., -: .-T :, .q , q ? . . . . ' . . . . , % . . . . , , ? . . . , ? . . % ? . % . . : . % . % . % . . . . . .. .?: .: . .1 . - .% - . . .. % .% . . .- : . . .. .- . . -I ? . .1. :.%. 1: .. 1% -.% , - ", . ?, . I ,g., M , .' ? %, ,, ?-. ,- -. % . %--.. . - ., _. : - , ? ,- - % I . ,. - - . . . . . . . .- %. . . - . . l . %. . . : .. . . . . . . . -. . . %, - . . . . . . .. .: . :. . . % . . %, . . .. . -. . . . I. :?.- ... . . .. - . . , . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . : . . . . l . . . . 1 , . % . %. ' . . . I .: . %. .. .. : .- %. .%- - ..:%% ? . I .. %. . I . .- :. . : . . ..% . %.f%,?. %.% . ?- I .. . ., .. . .: %.. 1%.. -.,.: . . -,%. . .., . . 1. . ..- .. %-.. . --.. . . . . .: - . . ... . .. . . %. -. %: %.%:. . -'.. ?%.. % ..?,- -.. ,. . . -. . .. : %. ..%, ,.?. . : . .- . -%?-.., . ? -., ..% . . -.% . . ..% . . . . - .. .?., . :. . .. . . .: . . .. %. . . .I ' . - . - .. - . . m. ., . . ; . . . . : %,.: .:-: .%: . . .:. % . . .. . -:..? _.,e .;.-% ..1-. %. . . . . :.?. %:.: . . %. . . .%.: ...%-.,: ,%. - . -.% : , .: . .% - . ? :. - . :.., . %.,'%.:-.. . 1?..- ,%..-: .%, .v . . .-,% . . : ? . % ,: 1 ...- . . . ?.-% , -..- : -. %%-- ., ..% ,'-.;,. : ,.- .e :- . .- . ?:- .e . . .. - . . .? . :. %e, . -. ., .. : ., ..- ". -,. . %. .. I. . ,.- :- ... ., . . . . . . - . .% .-. . .- .. .:I.- I. :. . . - - . : ..- . . %. .. . . . .. : . . .. .%. .? - . . . . . . . . . . .%%: . . %: .% . . ..W% :. - . : - - - ,. %::. . . . - % . . . . . . . '. %1 .,% . % ? . ?. . .I. . - %.:?%-. ... ..: %. . : .- , . . : %.-..-l , -.%I- -%.% :. . :%. - . ?.:. . . - .. -. -. .--%e.: ? % . --, ., -.?., ? .- ?, . .:% .,?- .:-% ",.-. ,, .0, % ,-: , . . , - :k- -,:, - -? %?- .,: . ,. -. :,. . -.1, .-. % . . . . .:?. . . . % . .. .% . . ::% .. -:- .,%. :-. . . . . ? % %%:.-- . ., %.- .%..:.- .. .. . . . . : .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . : . . . . . . %. - .: -I. % . , . . , .. . ,. - .. %:,.--.%. : , .?, j. - - .-. % ' - ,%, - . -% --. ,.ul,;-. . I .e . . -%.- . . ..-, %..,-, %. -. -. . '. -'.,?-:.,I , . %.-. - .,.%.: - -" .,, . .?%-,.%- .. ,.%-: . :..- . . . ?-%. ..:, . . 1.. -?. : %,. .,. - ._? - - ,?-.::" ,:. :%.- :,.- . ,--:, ?. %..: - .,. -: . , ,% % -,.%-,.--. 1%. ?%. : .. ? . .- - . ,%. '%..? :.%. ,. : % . . . . -. . :. ? . : . . . . ,. ..: :.% ..:%. :..%. .?,. %-:.. ..?-%: -. .' , . : - %- .:? . . . : : ..: . .. . .-. . . . . . . : . .. .. . . . . - . . .. . . . . . .1 - , `,j .% . . %"V %. - ? . . . %. -. .-% . - . . .% . - .- . . ,?. e ? ?. . - ,. - ? . ., . : . -: .%: -, . - . %.: %-.: . . :., . ,- .% . :.% _ % - . . . %: . .- . . . - . ? - .- -.:' . . . . . ; ;,
ml, ?,g EW'. ?:,
?.
r%
%.,
:.%
.:%,
3
1%. .?
? ,
.?: ,. ,
,
rq?
.% .1
:
%. :-,
.,:%.
..
?
. .
. .;?: .
:?
.
A
?
. -. .' . ,%-
?:.
.0,
,?
.
.
%
%:. %.
?i,.
.
.,
-?%.
%:.- %
. .
, i?
?
?:,-.:%.-,t
,;?.
.5
-
.
.%
.%
e w
v
o
:
tw
?.
-A
?
4"
,
.
.
.%
.
.
%.-
.
I-
? 14SWIV:
w
e
. %. .
.
*-.:
?
,?"?
o
lim
0 0
1 1 - i",
"
w?
mpvmw
1
1.
.0-1
.
?,
-. 4,.: ?. %?.:? .:-
'?.
:-
,?
.:
:-
.
%:?
.:
-%,:
?,. ,%:
.:
?:
?%.
:
.:
.
e
:.,
.
:.
,:. ;: -
.
%
. .-
.:
. ;.?
,%;.?
.: ,
.l
.,:?. ? . . %. .,
?
.
. . ,?.%:.
4
:%?
:?5.
:,W?
.
?-
:
,
%?.?%S,,-.? ,a.
-.
-1
,?
%:1W,
-
,;
,?
:-
.:
. ? . ?.-,; ,%
.:
*-,
:
?,:.
o,%&
?Ilnlj
?,
,?%
g?V,
.
?- ,?.
?
?- ,:?.-
%-
,. -.; .
l?.,?.- .?
,
?,
.;%
.;
.?
. .?'
.,%?:
o
?r, kl,. ,?
,? .? -
-.,
,;? . -. . -:.
.,
%:.
% .?, . -
.% ,:-.
,
-. ,
.
-%-
I.: :
. :. . . -.
.e:%
?%
.
:? -,:?,j?-4,w Q
,
.,
. : :,. ? , -. %%:,:
V
-,. e -:? ,-
,"'M
e:
:? ?,.6?. ;-
-:.
-?:
-M
,? wj:,.?
.
?
.-?
-?,
., .:?
?.% -
v
-
.:`
.
.? ?
:
.:
:
%?-
.,e %- ,
.?:
en,.?%?:
?. . %. .
-
"
?.
-
% %Z. -,. ?%-
?,
.
.
.%
e
?.
?
.:, .
%?:
:%
.
?,
.:
!? :
,;.:
IN
:e.
.: ,
1? :-....,..:... . :`
.:
?.Fl
.;
,?%?
w.? -:? .:,? %
"',.
:.
.
?
,. ?-.,
%?:-
4,%:, ?. ,t
w? :,%,?:.,?- .:?
:.
?I
,.?-
?
,.? %. .-
.
.
Ma
'I, k:
r"
W
-!,.g?
? -.
?:%,:? ,%
?.,
"
-?.
-1.5,? :
-%
.?%
:
?
?,
" i ;
.
.
.
: .- ? ?:. .
'i
--,:
,
?,
-?
.%,
.,
-.,?:-.%.
. .? .?
". .
?:
:?
.
?.-
.,*:%,
:, ?
. .,
% %,
?-
,
%.
.:?-
e,.-
?
:
n4
:
?.
_
:.
Lr.
-., ? ?
.%:
:?
.:
.
.
.
.%?
.
,.?:
?M
-
"R
,? ;,%
-&.
,?
I
x
-,.
?
-
.
:
.
.
.-I
.
.
M,? ,R
-;?
,?: ,.s?
e.
.il:,
".
:
?%:
:
.
0,?%!?
?,?.,
?
1%
.?
.
.
.
.:-%
.,:? .
.
-
?,.
I.-
:
.
?
? .-
.%
.
:
.
.?:
?
.j,
. -,
:
*
?,
.-:
.?
.
-
.?
?, %.-
.
,
-
:?
.,-
:.
.
?. %
?
:
.
-1.
.
.?,%. ,
.
.
. -,? j,?
.,
-
.,
:.
.
. :.
?.-, ? .
?;"., -.? -, .-%: :;.: -
.:
:
.
.
.
:%.
.:?
.
.
.
,-?
-.,?:
.
.
.
.,
.
.
e?.,
. .
.:
.?
?:.
.
%:?. :
?.:
-
.:,? . -.
:?.
.,
:
.- w
.: .
-
:%.%,.%. %. -:.
.
. . .
.
? .
.
.
-
.
% .,:
:-.
.
:.
.? :?. ? ? :? '.'%.:?.;%!?:?.
.,
:
: .%
.
.
:
.,;?
-?
?-:
-
-%
-,'.
,
. . .:
?
:-%.
.
.1
-?
.
.
?k
.
cP" ,
,1?.
1
.
-.?,
I.-1%
?
"96
,?-
,.?;1, .
,N-
?,
.p ?,.
.
%:?,.
e:%?
-.
?%
. . .-..- . .
.:
,. , .
;
:-_,?
.
%i.
.1 .
W
?.
? %,? ,
?;
.
., ?.
.
%..: :.
:
;
.
.
.:
?:%,?
.
?
.:
%C:,
.
-.
:,
-:.%
.
,-
R ?, XM ?, -l ?,.?Y,?-X?-, ?
.:
?
,?.
?,
.:%
-.:
W.
%.
-?.e
.-
.
!R,
gn,
W, ,V%? ,&
-?
?.:
?
,%
;-
.:% .
-
-:
.
.-
. .
. : . .
Y
.:?
;?
:
*
J
. ?-. .? -,.:,.?
.,%:.
:
.%
?-
-
:
I
. .
. :.-
.
:.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1.
4
.,v: ?,
.:
.
.
,:?
.%
?I
I
-,k?
1*
- ,.? , :-,
.
.
.
?
-
0?,-
V,
:
:.
,-.
%-
? .,%. %.
-
. .
.;%? .
.,;? -
W
?,
.
-.%
.
.
.,l;.:*.
:
%.,:
:.?
c:l
.: .
:,
.;
-!. I?
.:
.
.
-
.
?
?.,
.,
.,
?_:X N, `?1-71-?,
'A
?0,
-',
,";`-
.
"
.
.
.-, .%?
.,:;
",
.
.;,
.
-1
:
?
.
.: .
:.
,
:,.
. .
?
g
?.%
10:
-
-.?:
.'
,
.,-%:.-
I. r
-:
. .. -
.
?:,
?
"
.;?
-.
.-!:? .
.,.?.?.,.?, -. ,-.,%?. -%.?
:,?
.,
?-? .:e:%&?%?
-,
., .,
?:?,- ".' .,
:
.:
?
?
."
.?
-,:c-% ,-?
-?
.,:
. . '. '. . . ,
1.
?%,A
-Z;lje.
.,
%.
.
%.
:.
,
-4?: -:
.?! .
.:?
.:?
?.
.
-?
:.?
.? l.,:?
. .:
?-:
:. :?. :- ? , -
. -.:,%.l,
.,
-1
-:.?
.-t?:.-;%.:
?
:.
-?w:._ . . : .?: ?: .:? !",?"
.,?
"
.
-.
r a ?.-%.,
"
.:
Mo.
.
.
,?.,:.-
%.
.
m
%.:
.,
%1:.
-^,?
',
,
.,;
.,? :.V-%?
-?,
:,-
:
?%.
"k*
,?
???:?',?,.";,:.,?. :?. . .?,?.:?-.:?.:? ?_-: ?,'
-.". '. . j.
?-. E.-? .
,k?%
.,-
:,-
:
?,; %.?3?%,?.: . -
?
:?
.??,, ?,?-,%?,??,;??f-?,%??,%??.-:,,???,.?,:', %-?:',. j:%, ? -:, .,? ?.
-?
.?;:,
%
?,
.%:
.: ? .:? : ?
.:,:.%?:., ,.,?,%,;??:., %.,.o.- ?,w
,%,.-:m
."
e,:?
-
?
.;%?, :?.,
. . . . ".,
.
1?-.
?,
,q".
?.
:
%,.:
,
?:,%C,%??:,4%?-:,?-?%.?:'.??.%?%:. :?:. :.
?, .;: .,
?,:-
.,
,-
I.
I.:
.
. . :%., : .:
.
.:% .,
k
. . :, ?- .
,.?:
?-.
.? ,
.?:;?.
.
,4
."
" ? .?
:
-,?.
:
"
?l
x-,
,
'.
,:?.
.,
.
.
.
-
.:-
.?
-?
?:
jl:'.?,
.l
?.:
?
?n
?.
.
-,. -:? .1;?:.-e,?:.?- %.?
?.:
.? .?
.?,
? l?
?
?, -
%:
%.
.
%.
.: :
:
.
?
. ?.:? ,.?
4
.?
1:
.:
?-,
?
'.5
op.
.;
.
.
?,
A
?vri,:?.c,%,i:
!.
-. . %.3,N.j ? .3 .
?,
.
:-l
;,%? .;-,%?.,?. :? :.
,%
?.
*
? ,: .
,;
.
-?.:
.:,
:-
.:
.,?-
?4
.
.
,
,-: , ?;- - -
.
?4 "I
j%?K.
%.-, .k?%
":?1, ? l
?, :
-,? .
. 3 . ,.-
?,- .
? .%?,
.
,?
?, ?7:Vv
4:. .
.',
.c
:.
,
-e
e:,%, :?
.e?,%:.
?
"
? :. , ,?
.%
-:.?
V
,
.
;1'. l n
? f.? ; . ?:
-:
:
,.
:'
?.;%:? N,:?%
.:
:?.
.&
.
.
-.%
.
?.
?. ?.,-?: . . ?,%?:
?.:
;:
:? :?
:.% .:
.,
-
-:
?
.,-
,
%:
:.?
?,
:,?-
?
I
E:?,.
.
.1
1%,
-
.
.
.
.:%
?
. :?.
.?
.
.? .
,
1, ?
?-
.
0130
"
:?.
%,?
:?-
.
.:
.% ?.
.%
.
:?.
?. .
.?:
%,. -
?
"
.
%,?
4?
-1:
.
.
%-?
.%?w
,.
.e:v
A
.1.1. :.- ,?.: ?,-.
.
%.
.% ?
.
,:.
%?
.,
-
v
%.-:? .-
.,:%?.
?-,
.
.
:
.-
,?.
-A
. . . .%,:; .?W
.
:?
.
.?x .?, %
.
.
.
.-
?.,-
.
.
*
:lk
:
. .
;.
-?w_
:,.
:%?
:
.
.:
?,
,.
.
.
:. .
.;
%-?
:.
. :5.
. . . . . . . .,-. . ,:. .
?%-
?,6
%,-
,. .,
- ?:-
.:
Zk.
.:,?
. . .?
%:
'?;
%Z. ?
,:.
:.
,. : .
. %:.
-
%,
1 ..
.:?%.
?
.? . .
?
?%.,t
lKe
%. .?: .
?.
6?
,
%?
.:?
..
.
? c?.- .:
?,
,.
-
.
. :.
%.
I.
:%."
.:
.-:
%- ?. ,:. :.
:.
:
%.-
:?
?
?:
.:
-?
.1
?:
. .o .
.
?
?%
:
,
.:
`?O
. :.
%:?
.
.?
.!I
.:
.v
eX?
:1
?:
,.
?
.-
,?%
- .;,
.
?
ev,:? :.
. %:
.
,.?
:."
?
:.
.,:
*1 ? .
.
,al
.
V
-.:;?:*
'.
%.
.
.:- .
.
.-
.
,?
-:.,
.:-?
.:
:?.
%.
.-:%
-?, _eS.;, .? ?:1 - ?-. ?-%k. . .
-
,: %,-
?%?
,q
?,%
.?,
,:
.
:;,%?.
,?
.-,?.
"
,.
:,?
"
?
..1?
iole-?,
<.
wl.e .
I
.%
.: .
.
-?
., -
-.?
.X
. _.- ?",? :-%.-
. -.
.
?:.? . .
.
%.:-
,.
.
-:.
:;
:
:
:
4
:
?
:,?-
.?
0. .
.
?.:,
%:.4
.
.-
-,:
%
.?
,.:
?.:
:?.
:
.:
%.. ,:?:. %
.:
.:
?%:%.
?.,
:
-
4?6
%.:
-?
:?
.
.%
.
:?%.
.
.?
-.
.:;?!,
.:
.
.,
"
?,
,:?, ?.% ?,%
.
.
-
.
:
?:
%.-
%,j?.
.
:
-,s:%
s.
-
%..: ?. - :.
,
:.
.
.
,?.-
"*w,40
-
.:
-:
%1:0
w
.
.
.
.% ,
z
.
.:
-4,.
.
:
lm
'. . . . . :. -el. .
:
?,
:.
%:
-
.
.
? A
.
,
1
eK
v
.
-? .?,
-W
o
,1 1
.
.
.
,?b
:
,:?. %
%.
:
k
.
. :. . .
.%:
.
4?
.?%.
?,:
:
.
:
:
?:
.?
.:
1-:%.
"
.:? .
:.%
?
i-
.,? .,: . .: : .
.
.
,.?
A
?:.
:%
.:
-?
.
:.
:.
%.:
e,*
-
*
-4
?:6
I.c
*
.%
:.
1 I.
V.
.
.%
a,"
?
?, ?-.
1 .1 0-
.
:
.
,?
.
S:
?%:
.
.:
....-...
.
.
w.?
*
.%.
*
- -.- ?
.
.,:
-
*. *V.
-
-?
?,.
. .:,
.:
?,
loq ft
.
.
.:
,
1? *
. .
. . %.
%..-. :.-
:.
.
:
.
.
.
.-
I
.j;
,?L4L_ ~
Donald R. Vancereceiveda M.A. in HebrewLanguagefromthe Institute of Holy LandStudiesin Jerusalem, Israeland studied NorthwestSemitic philologyunderDennis Pardeeat the OrientalInstituteof the Universityof Chicago.Vanceis currentlyteachingat OralRobertsUniversity.He is finishing his Ph.D.in the JointDoctoralProgram at theUniversityof Denverand the Iliff Schoolof Theologyand is writinghis dissertationon the absenceof meterin biblicalHebrewpoetry.His research interestsincludethe historicalgrammarand epigraphyof the Northwest Semiticlanguagesas well as computer applicationsto textualstudies,particularlyfontdevelopment. borrowedby the Latinswhose alphabet is the basis of our own. In this article,we will explore the most important inscriptionswritten in Phoenician,in an arearangingfrom Mesopotamia to Spain. We will begin with a brief outline of the history of the language, pointing out the elements that distinguish it from the other Semitic languages. Then we will discuss the inscriptionsthemselves, pointing out the contributionsthey make to the history of Palestineand Syria.Since the history of Phoeniciais a history of its cities, we will group the inscriptionsaccordingto the citiesin which they were found and will discuss them chronologically.
Name, Language, and Script Name Phoeniciais the ancient Greek term for the coastal area between the Litani and
4
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Arvad rivers, an area that corresponds roughly to modem Lebanon,along with parts of modem Israel and Syria. The Greekphoinike, 'Phoenicia'is relatedto the Greek word phoinix'purple,'and it is generallybelieved that the region got its name from the dye, since a purple dye was manufacturedin this area. Moscati (1965:3-4), however, argues for the product being named after the region. Phoinike,is attested in Homer (Od.4.83) and a term for purple, po-ni-ki-ya,describinga cart(Moscati1965:3),is found in Linear B, the late second millennium Greekin syllabicscriptfrom Mycenae. The Semitic term for the region is kncn,'Canaan'.The earliestuse of Canaan is in the cuneiform texts of Ebla, which date to the third millennium BCE, where it appears as ki-na-na-im.5 It also occurs as kinazbuin a letterto YasmahAdad (1796-1780BCE), king of Mari (Sasson 1984:90).At Nuzi, the word kinabhu, according to the CAD, refers "tothe dye and the colorproducedfrom it," while in the Amama letters Canaan is called which is sometimes written matKinajhi matKi-na-a-ni(EA 137:76).The Greek term,then, accordingto Speiser (1936), is a calque,that is, a translationof an equivalent Canaaniteexpression. He postulatesa Canaaniteterm for purple, *kncn,(as yet un-attested) from which the ancient designation of the region, *kncn(kinacnu= cuneiform kinahnu; Hebrew kendcan, 'Canaan'),was derived. Astour (1965),however, argues that the originalform was *inacu with the addition of an "attested,though rare, Semitic noun-forming suffix" -n- ,from a root *kncmeaning "to bow down" and, when said of the sun, "toset." Thus "itwould be exactlyequivalent to the Latin occiderethe derived form KinaCuor the 'OcciKinanu signifying dent', the 'Landof Sunset'or 'Westland' the WestSemitic translation or counterpartof Amurru,"the Mesopotamian term for Syria which means 'West'(Astour1965:348).Muhly (1970:29)feels that Astour's hypothesis is impossible. Rather,he agrees with Speiser that the Greek title is a calque, but from the Hurrian kinabiu rather than from a Canaanite *knc(Muhly 1970:34).
The term Canaan,however,included more than justPhoenicia;it encompassed most of the Levant, including Phoenicia, Israel,Moab, and other territories.Therefore, whereas the Greek authors could use phoiniketo designate just Phoenicia, Semitic writers used the name of the prominent Phoeniciancities, such as Gubla (Byblos), Tyre,and Sidon. For example, the author of Jdg 3:3 refers to the Phoeniciansas the 4ffdoni,'Sidonian(s); and the author of 1 Chr 22:4 ssorim, 'the speaks of haJfd6ntmweta Sidonians and the Tyrians'Such use of city names is explained, at least in part, by the fact that Phoenicia,unlike first millennium Israel,was never a unified country.At various times in Phoenicia's history,one or anotherof its majorcities would be more powerful, but they never banded togetherto form a nation.Byblos held sway early on, then Tyrepredominated in the first half of the first millennium, and during the Persian Period, Sidon was the chief city.6
Language
Fromthese same citiesand theircolonies, inscriptions written in a North-west Semitic language have been recovered.7 This language is called Phoenicianand is closely related to Hebrew. Phoenician developed through several phases and into several dialects:Old Byblian (11th/ 10th cent. BCEinscriptions from Byblos; e.g., Ahiram);Byblian(6th/4th cent. BCE inscriptions from Byblos;e.g., Yehaumilk); North Phoenician(9th-7th cent. BCEinscriptions from Syria,Cilicia, and Ur; e.g., Karatepe);Middle Phoenician (6th-4th cent. BCEinscriptions mainly from Tyreand Sidon;e.g., Eshmunazar); Late Phoenician(3rd-Ist cent. BCEinscriptionsmostly from Umm el-CAmedancient Hammon-south of Tyre,e.g., Umm el-CAmediv); the dialects of Cyprus (9th-2nd cent. BCEinscriptions from Cyprus, e.g., Temple TariffA, B); the WesternMediterranean(9th-5thcent. BCEinscriptions, e.g., Golden Sheet of Pyrgi);Punic (WesternMediterranean texts 5th cent. BCEto the fall of Carthage in 146 BCE,e.g., Carthage Sacrifice Tariff);and LatePunic (WesternMediterraneantexts from 146 BCE to the 6th cent. alter CE,e.g., Lybian inscription)."
PhcenicianIsoglosses Featuresthat are unique to a language group, language, or dialect and which can be used to distinguishit fromanother language group, language, or dialect are called isoglosses. Isoglosses can be of a phonological nature (vowels and consonants) and of a morphological nature(e.g.,the conjugationof verbs),but they can also be syntactic (e.g., expressions of genitival relations)or lexical (vocabulary). Phonology. Proto-Semitic*hhas fallen together with h (e.g., *39,'brother'4 Phoenician"h);*9and *twith s'(e.g.,s'bc, 'satiety'4 Phoenicians?bC; *tit 'three'-PhoenicianJsV);9 *dwith z (*d, 'this' 4Phoenicianz); *zand *dwith s (e.g., *hz 4 'arrow' Phoenician land'"c with *Jrd., Phoenician9ri);and *g*,; (e.g., *glmt, 'young girl, maid' - Phoenician-lmt). Hebrew exhibitsthese same phenomena with the exceptionthatit preservesProtoSemitic *s,.The Aramaic languages, though sharingsome of these phonological shifts, exhibit some differentones (for which see Layton [1988]:174-175). In Late Punic, the Phoenicianlaryngeals and h and the Phoenicianpharyngeals c and h were weakened and sometimes lost altogether.As for vowels, as near as can be determinedfor Phoenicianand early Punic (since these languages did not write the vowels), the repertoire was made up of a, i, and u, and J (due to the Canaaniteshift wherein an original dbecame 6-in fact this j often developed in Phoenicianto 4),1o 1,and ia. Whether the a arising from lengthening of a existed is debated. Phoenicianreduced the diphthongs *ayto j and *aw to J (examples: *baytuis in Phoenician bht,'house',cf. the Greekname of the letter b~ta,and Hebrew construct state b~t, versus the Hebrew absolutebdyit,(Segert 1976:76?36.71);and *mawtubecomes in Phoenicianmotand even mit as the Greek transcriptionsmot,and mout attest [Sanchuniaton 2 and 34]). Morphology. The Proto-Semiticfeminine marker *t (or *at)is preserved in Phoenicianwhereas in Hebrew, for the most part,it has become a (e.g.,Ugaritic *tlmt,'girl',PhoenicianClmt,'maid, and
Hebrew Calmd,'young woman'). Old Phoenicianhas a reflexive voice of the Ground stem which is formed by infixing a t between the first and second radicalsof the root (a Gt stem), (e.g.,Ahiram, line 2; jussive,3rd, feminine,singular,thtsp"may it be plucked out," thtpk "mayit be overturned").This patternis found in Ugariticand in the Mesha stone but is only a relicin Hebrew preserved in the place name 3eltfqP.Phoenician and Hebrew use the definite articlehawhile Aramaicindicatesthe determined state of a noun with the suffix -a. Phoenician is unique among the Semitic languages in formingits causativestem with a prefixed y-forming a Yipcil-which developed from the older *hi-.ll
'UN,
For the verb 'to be', Phoenicianuses the root kn where Hebrew uses hyh,and for 'to make', Phoenicianuses the root pCIwhereas Hebrew predominantly uses csh.The Phoenicianword for 'gold' is hr~while the Hebrew one is zhb.13 Phoenicianand Hebrew use benfor 'son' while Aramaicuses bar(see Gras,Rouillard, and Teixidor1989:30-31).
Script
The Phoenicianscript was borrowed by the Hebrews and the Aramaeansfor their languages.14It consists of 22 signs and, given the "complete absence of spelling variationsin the Phoenicianinscriptions as far back as they go," the 22 letters of the alphabetwould appearto satisfycompletely the needs of the language, that is, the signs stand in one-toone correspondence to the phonemes they represent.'5 This is not true in Hebrew, for where example, N:: __ one sign (CL) is made to stand .........
forboth// and
/?/. The Masoretes later dis~P fm~wa NN tinguished this dual use by means of diacriticalmarks (t and t respectively). The Phoenician script is consonantal;there are no signs Lexicography. Where Hebrew uses 16", for vowels. As noted above, it was the 'not',Phoenicianuses bl, 'not' (baloccurs Greeks who transformed the script in Ugaritic and in Hebrew but is comby having the signs which stood for paratively rare).Phoenicianhas the inPhoenicianconsonants not present in the Greek language represent the dependent personal3rd,m, s, pronoun h t, 'he, him' (= Ugaritichwt)in addition vowels (e.g., Phoenicianh became the to h , 'he, him' which Hebrew has. The Greek vowel e, epsilon).16Later,the words ksA,'throne'and htr 'scepter' in sporadic use of certain consonants to line 2 of the Ahiram inscriptionare of indicate certain vowels (the so-called feminine gender (as they are in Ugaritic) matreslectionis),much like the system whereas they aremasculinein Hebrew.12 in Hebrew and Aramaic, developed, ?CIX:gl.N
Biblical 57:1(1994) Archaeologist
5
but mainly in the West (in the Eastthis practicewas rare and chiefly in foreign names and words). The names of the lettersarenot known fromPhoenician but only from the Hebrew and Greek traditions.The Phoenicianalphabetmay be the end result of a long development from the script of the Proto-Sinaiticinscriptions,but this is not certainsince the Proto-Sinaiticinscriptions are still not fully deciphered.17The laterPunic script becameincreasinglycursiveusing increasing numbersof lettercombinationscalled ligatures (our sign wis a ligaturerepresenting the vowels o and e) so that very late texts can be quite difficult to decipher.18Phcenician,like Hebrew,is written right to left (at the time of the El-Khadr arrowheads [c. 1150-950 BCE], however, the orientationof the script seems to have not been fixed [see below and Lemaire 1989:53-54]).Some of the inscriptions use marks to indicate the division between words, but as a rule Phoenician inscriptionsdid not divide words.19The Phoenicianscript was not, however, the only one employed to record the language. Thereare Phoeniciantexts in both the Greek and Roman alphabets and perhaps one text in the Ugaritic alphabetic cuneiformscript(Greenstein1976). In addition, there are some Phoenician words in the Egyptian hieroglyphicand hieratictexts as well as in some Akkadian texts and even in Mycenaeanlinear B, the late second millennium Greek in syllabic script from Mycenae.
The Inscriptions
There are thousands of PhoenicianinSemitscriptions;the CorpusInscriptionum icarum(CIS)alone has 6058!However, the geographic distributionof these inscriptions is not uniform. There are only about one hundred from Phoenicia proper and anotherhundred or so from Cyprus. The ancient city of Carthage in Tunisiaproduced thousands of texts,and severalhundredcome fromthe rest of Tunisiaand WesternAlgeria. The texts were generally found where they were made, but some have been transported to other places. A large funeral stelafromNorth Africawas takento Avignon, France,and a small ivory box was 6
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
carriedto Ur in Mesopotamia.The texts were carved in stone (both incised and in relief),scratchedon ostraca(potsherds) and intact vessels, inscribed on metal and ivory, and penned with ink on ostracaand papyri. Thereis even a section in the Latincomedy Ponulus by Plautus where a certain Hanno gives several lines of dialogue in Punic (Sznycer1967). Greek authors make mention of Phoenicianbooks on papyrusbut none is extant today. There are no mythological texts preserved. Most of the texts are funerary (e.g., Ahiram'scoffin)and/or votive (e.g., Umm el-CAmedxiii), but there are some building (e.g.,Yehimilk)and royal (e.g., Kilamuwa)inscriptions.The overwhelming majorityof texts are the dedicatory formulaeon the stele associated with the burials in the Tanitprecinctof Carthage (e.g., KAI#88).20There are a few inscriptions detailing the offerings in a sanctuary (e.g., the TempleTariff). Thereare two private letters on papyri (KAI## 50-51) and many examples of noncontiguous texts (i.e.,isolated words and phrases) such as personal names in seals and graffiti (Phceniciannames have been found on Egyptian monuments). We turn first to inscriptions from Phoeniciaproper.
with Egypt. It is to this period that the Temple of the Obelisks (the court of this temple had a greatnumber of stone obelisks) belongs and to which Dunand relegatedthe Pseudo-Hieroglyphic"enigmaticByblianinscriptions"23TombsI-IV of the royalnecropolisdate to the Middle BronzeAge. The archaeologicalremains from the LateBronzeAge include Tombs V-IX;TombV contained the Ahiram sarcophagus. There is a complete absence of Iron Age stratifiedlevels from Byblos, yet we know from Iron Age texts such as the Egyptian tale of Wen-Amon (ANET:25-29)that the city existed at that period. It is possible that the Iron Age city is under the modem construction of Jebeiland is thus not available for excavation. Ahiram (KAI##1-2). In 1923, Pierre Montetdiscoveredin the royalnecropolis of Byblosa stone sarcophagus decorated with
" P:q
Byblos
AncientGubla (biblicalGeba1,see 1 Kgs 5:22)lies near the modern Lebanese village of Jebeilabout25 miles northof Beirut.Gublawas known to classicalauthors as Byblos, from its brisk trade in Egyptian papyrus(byblosin Greek).Excavations there attest to the great antiquityof the site. The firsturbansettlementwas in the EarlyBronze Age. In addition to houses and a wall around the Bronze Age city, the excavatorsunearthedon the same site a series of temples which continue to the Roman period.At one point, the temple was dedicatedto BaclatuGubli 'the Lady of Byblos'.21 The presence of small objects and texts attests to Egyptian contact going back to the Protodynastic period and lasting,with some interruptions,22down to Roman times. In the Middle Bronze Age, Byblosincreased its interactionwith the Aegean region and extended trade
.
..~:i,
.:• ....::.:.:,f
i?iP
•,•.::i
~
'•! ••':I•• •iiii•
?
:~~~~,P~PS I~
~:i
,
bas reliefs depicting a king participating in various royal functions.It bore the following Phoenicianinscription:
1Sarcophagus which Ittobaalbin Ahiram, King of Byblos, made for Ahliram,his father,when he put him in the tomb. 2 If a king among kings, or a governor among governors, or an army commander should come up to Byblosand expose this sarcophagus, may the scepter of his rule be snatched away, may the throne of his sovereignty be overturned, and as for peace, may it flee from Byblos, and as for him, may his inscription be erased before Byblos. The stone where the last two words of the inscriptionare carved is very rough, which has made the reading of these words difficult.Teixidor(1987:139),
using new photographs, proposes the reading given here.24 The sarcophagus, with its inscription, was originally dated by its archaeological context to the 13th century BCE. Dunand, in a postscript to his Byblia Grammata,lowered his date for the sarbecauseof some cophagus to ca. 1000BCE Iron age pottery discovered in the shaft of the tomb. Archaeologicalarguments have, however, been offered to support the earlierdate by explaining the Iron Age sherdsas latercontamination(Hachmann 1967,Porada1973:356-357,and cf. Garbini 1977b:81-85).25 Some have dated the inscriptionitself on paleographic grounds to the first half of the 10th century (Dunand 1945; Albright1947).Martin(1961:70-75),having reexamined the sarcophagus, discovered on it a Pseudo-Hieroglyphic inscription that predates the Phoenician
one, the latterbeginning after and, for the most part, avoiding the earlierone. From the archaeological,art-historical, and paleographic arguments, one can surmise that the sarcophagus was probably made in the 13th century and inscribed with a Pseudo-hieroglyphic inscription. Later,around 1000 BCE,Ittobaal reused the sarcophagus to bury his father Ahiram and had a new inscription added to it. Furtherup the tomb shaft Montet found a seemingly contemporary inscription warning potential grave robbers: "' Beware!2 Warning!There is disasterfor you 3 here below!" If this inThe sarcophagus of Ahiram, king of Byblos (c. 1000 BaC)with the oldest continu-
ousandreadable of any Phoenician inscription substantial lengthincisedaroundtheedgeof the lid.Photograph of Darelbypermission MachreqPublishers.
VF
Vt..
v?. o-A
e- A.. Al
q
Al.
. . .. ..
M.
AV J,,?: Nv-
'Ile
-lc
lew
41F
.
..
v
-C.
?
o
?Nl'.:e?
vy am 4
?.
.. A-
ik
q3
.
ul
.
.
.
. BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
7
OP.
0(5, I
(4J
. .
? ?. . .............. . . . .
.,
.
r
: , ..
.
?
' ......... ''"
: : : :::: :.::: .
?
"
..
The inscription of "Shipitbaal, king of Byblos, son of Elibaal,kingof Byblos,son of Yehimilk,kingof Byblos,"dedicatedto BaalatBybloscommemoratingShipitbaal'srebuildingof a retainingwall for the acropolisof Byblos.Itwas carvedin a limestoneblockwhich Dunand found in 1935 among the remainsof the wall.Courtesy of W Rdllig.
Menander's kings of Tyre
Inscriptional kings of Byblos
Abibalus Hirom(34 yrs.) Balbazer (17yrs.) Abdastratus (9 yrs.)
Abibaal Ahiram Ittobaal Yehimilk
Methusastartus(12 yrs.)
Elibaal
(9 yrs.) Astharymus
Shipitbaal
scription is to be associated with that of the sarcophagus,it would seem that Ittobaal went to great lengths to insure that no one else would do what he himself did, usurping the tomb for his own use. The two Old Phoenicianinscriptions of the sarcophagus and the tomb shaft are the earliestintelligiblePhcenicianinscriptions of any length and are important for paleography,the development of Phoeniciangrammar,and the history of Byblos. The two inscriptions use 20 out of the 22 Phoeniciancharactersand thus provide nearly a complete catalogue of the alphabet. As for the grammar,the sarcophagus inscription shows that the Gt verb pattern (thtspand thtpkof line 2)-which is found in the earlierUgaritic language and in the Moabite language of the later Mesha inscription,but not in Hebrewwas productiveat one point in the development of the Phoenicianlanguage; it does not appearin the laterPhoenician inscriptions. With respect to the history of SyroPalestine, the inscriptionreveals at least one rulerof Byblosand perhapstwo, depending on whether Ahiram was a king 8
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Concurrent Pharaohs
Absolute dates
Shoshenq1(21yrs.) 945-924 BCE
Osorkon1(35 yrs.)
924-889 BCE
or not. Ahiram was a common name; in fact, the name Hiram in the verse quoted at the opening of this articleis a shortenedform of Ahiram.26This Hiram is listed as the king of Tyreduring the reigns of David and Solomon (2 Sam 5:11and 1 Kgs 5:15 [Eng 5:1]),that is, in the first half of the 10th century BCE,the period of our inscription,but any relation with Ahiram of Byblos is doubtful. Yehimilk (KAI#4) Yehimilk,a palimpsest written over an earlierPseudo-Hieroglyphic inscription on a broken stone slab, is a dedicatory inscription in which Yehimilkdeclares that he has restored the ruins of the temples of Byblos.27In returnhe asks for a long life and reign over Byblos, "forhe is a righteous(sdq)king and an upright (ydr)king before (Ipn)the holy gods of Byblos."Surprisingly,Yehimilk provides no genealogy. This led Donner and Rbllig (1973:7)to wonder if he had usurped the throne of Byblos. Gibson (1982:17-19)sees furthersupport for this in the line quoted above which he translates "for [he is] the legitimate and rightful king...." Albright (1947:
157) noted a similar use of sdqand ydr in the Ugaritic text KTU 1.14 I:12-13: wife, his "he found his rightful (Qdqh) true (yfsrh)spouse." Avishur (1976:7-8) compares I Kgs 3:6 in which Solomon describes David's conduct before God: "...because [David] walked before(lpn) you in truth, in righteousness(sdqh),and in uprightness(ydrh)of heart concerning you." It is to be noted that David, too, ascended to the throne in a questionable manner. The phrase "righteous king" appears also in Yehawmilk'sinscription (line 9; see below) and also denotes a king whose legitimacy to the throne may have been questioned. Abibaal (KAI#5), Elibaal (KAI#6), and Shipitbaal I (KAI#7) The next three inscriptions to be discussed are intimately related to Yehimilk by virtue of the fact that Shipitbaal in his inscription lists Elibaalas his father and Yehimilkas his grandfather: 1Wall which Shipitbaal,king of 2 Byblos, son of Elibaal, king of Byblos, 3 son of Yehimilk,king of Byblos, built for Baalat 4 Byblos, his Lady.May Baalat Byblos lengthen 5 the days of Shipitbaaland his years over Byblos. The Abibaal text is inscribed on a statue of Shoshenq I (BiblicalShishak 945-924 BCE)28the 22nd Dynasty pharaoh whose attack on Jerusalem is recordedin 1 Kgs 14:25-26.29The Elibaal text is carved on a statue of Osorkon I These last two texts are (924-889 BCE). restored on the basis of the ShipitbaalI text, since they use the same formula (though they dedicate their respective statues ratherthan a wall-which Shipitbaal rebuilt perhaps either as part of a general restorationof the acropolis or in its continual maintenance). The large stone fragment on which the Abibaal inscription is carved (not pictured here) was a seat on which the likeness of Shoshenq (which is missing) was seated. Two largecartouchesof Shoshenqembellishedthe right face of this seat which also boasts the Abibaal
inscription.The top and bottom of the fragment are damaged, resultingin the loss of partsof both its lines.3?Given the size of the stone and the close parallel with Shipitbaal'scomplete inscription,it is probablethat Abibaal gave a genealogy but that it was in the missing part at the end of line one. Reconstructingthe relationship among these kings of Byblos is complicated. Yehimilkgave no genealogy in his text. Elibaalgives Yehimilkas his father,and Shipitbaalgives Elibaalas his fatherand
Yehimilk as his grandfather.Where does Abibaal fit in the sequence? Shoshenq I immediatelyprecededOsorkonI, which puts Abibaalin the same era as the other three,a conclusion which the paleographyof the inscriptionssupports. Donner and Rdllig (1973:7-8)have suggested that Abibaal was also a son of Yehimilk,in fact, the older brotherof Elibaalor,less likely,the younger brother of Yehimilk.31They point out the curious fact thatJosephus (Ant.8.144and Ag. Ap. 1.113),quoting Menander of Ephesus, statesthatan Abibaal(Abibalos)was succeeded by his son Ahiram (Eirdmos)! The chart to theleftdepicts the resultant succession of kings for Byblos. Unfortunately,the successors to Ahiram that Menander indicates (given in column one in the chart to the leftalong with the length of their reigns according to Menander) do not match the names from these inscriptions.Furthermore, the length of the combined reigns of Hirom, Balbazer,and Abdastratus is 60 years, while the combinedreignsof ShoshenqI and his successor Osorkon I is only 56 years. But it must be remembered that Menander is giving a list of the kings of Tyre while our inscriptions are dealing with the kings of Byblos. It may be that Abibaal and Ahiram were kings of both Tyreand Byblos and that Ahiram divided the two cities between two sons. If this is the case, the lengths of the reigns in Menander's list would be irrelevantto the synchronisms with the two pharaohs.32 The bust (ca. 27" tall) of Pharaoh Osorkon I (924-889 BCE) on whichthe inscriptionof his contemporary, "Elibaal, kingof Byblos,son of Yehimilk, kingof Byblos,"is clearlyvisible.Itbeginsjustunder Osorkon'shairon his leftshoulderandwinds clockwisearoundthe cartoucheup onto his rightshoulder.Eachsuccessivelinerunsoutside of the previousline.Photograph by permissionof the Lourve,? PhotoR.M.N.
The stele (ca. 50" tall) of Yehawmilk (5th Onwhich he is depictedin Persian centuryBCE) dress makingan offeringto the enthronedgoddess, BaalatByblos,who has the horneddisk and garmentsof the Egyptiangoddess Hathor. A winged solardiskhoversabove them both. Thetext commemoratesthe additionsYehawmilkmade to the goddess' smallshrine.When the stelewas firstfound,the bottomright-hand cornerwas missing.Thiswas found 70 years laterand the text is now virtuallycomplete. Photographby permissionof the Lourve, ? PhotoR.M.N.
Yehawmilk (KAI#10) In the PersianPeriod,Byblosfades in importance while Tyreand Sidon ascend in stature.This is not to say that the city was insignificant;it was prosperous enough to enable its kings to mint their own coins (Peckham 1968:47-50).The influence of Persia, however, was great. There was an impressive Achaemenid fortressoutside the Early Bronze Age city walls (Jidejian1968:93)and one king, Yehawmilk, was depicted in bas relief wearing Persian garb. The Yehawmilk inscription is on a limestone stela which has a bas relief of king Yehawmilk standing before the BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
9
The sarcophagus of Eshmunazar II,king of Sidon. It was manufacturedout of blackbasaltin the 5th centuryBCE in Egypt.Theinscriptionvisiblehere is actuallya second attempt. Thefirstattempt (not visiblein this photograph;it is illustrated on page 17)was begun on the body of the sarcophagusitself, below the humanhead carvedon the lid.The Eshmunazar inscriptionis the second longestextantPhoenicianinscription and containsnumerousparallelswith HebrewBibletexts. of the Lourve,? PhotoR.M.N. Photographbypermission
10
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
seated goddess Baalat Byblos, presenting an offering to her.Above them is a winged disk whose wings curve down following the contourof the curved top of the stela. Beneath the relief is the 16line inscription, more or less complete; the stela was missing the lower right hand corner when peasants found it in 1869, but this fragment was later recovered by Dunand in the 1920s near the two temples of Byblos.The script places the inscription significantlylaterthan that of ShipitbaalI; Peckham (1968:53) dates it to ca. 450 BCE. Yehawmilk identifies himself at the beginning of the text as the "king of Byblos, son of Yeharbaal,grandson of Urimilk king of Byblos, whom the GreatOne, BaalatByblos, made ruler over Byblos."It is interestingthatYehawmilk'sfatheris not called king, but his grandfather is. Peckham(1968:53)concludes from this that the successor of Urimilk was an unnamed brother of Yeharbaalwho died without an heir and was succeeded by his nephew (Yeharbaal'sson) Yehawmilk. The Temple of Baalat Byblos was renovated and received significant additions during the Per-
sian Period (Jidejian1968:96).The Yehawmilk inscription illustrates these changes by listing several items which the king dedicated to BaalatByblos:a bronze altar,a gold gateway,a gold winged disk, a shrine and its columns with their capitals and its roof. The stela itself was found near the shrineand the columns (Peckham1968:52). In the center of the stela's winged disk thereis a hole, which may have held a peg attaching an object of some kind to the stela. Line five describesthe gold winged disk as "(set)within the stone which is above this gateway of gold." Perhapsa gold winged disk was attachedto the stela.33 The inscription ends with the usual requests for long life forYehawmilkand curses on anyone who would damage the inscription or the other dedicated items. The GreekhistorianArrian(2nd century CE)tells us that Byblos surrendered to Alexander the Great without a fight (Arrian2.13.7-8). The culture of Byblos did likewise. In the Greek period Byblos is completely Hellenized and the inscriptions are written in Greek rather than Phoenician.
Sidon The site of Sidon has been the object of clandestine as well as organized excavationsince the discoveryof the Eshmunazar sarcophagus in 1855 (see below). Several tombs have been found around Sidon with the necropolis at Magharat Abloun,the "grottoof Apollo," yielding the most tombs. Severalinscriptionshave turned up in the orange groves that dot the area.Another area on the outskirts of Sidon, called the Ayaa, has yielded several rock-cuttombs with inscriptions. About 1.7 miles from the modem city, up in the foothillsof the Lebanonmountains and about 0.5 mile from the Mediterraneanshore, the temple of Eshmun was discovered(Eiselen1907:7).This site, which is identified as Cnydll in line 17 of the Eshmunazar inscription, was excavated by a Turkisharchaeological mission beginning in 1901. A shrine to Ashtartwas also found there.The temple complex was built on the southern bank of the Nahr-el-Awaly (the river Asclepius of antiquity) and diverted some of
its water into a canal, for the waters were consideredto have healing powers. Pilgrims would immerse themselves in the canalseeking a curefor theirdiseases. In this canal, eleven marble statues of childrenhave been found, some of which bearPhoenician inscriptions thankingthe god Eshmun for healing the child that the statue represents (see Baalshillem below). The areas of excavationare scattered all around the city,including the port itself with its ancient sea break. A Crusader castle sits on top of a huge mound of crushed murex shells, the sea mollusk from which the famous purple dye of Phoeniciawas extracted.
?,'
?: "'?
'
'•'t
T
. ?
,,
. .%
Aerial view of the Eshmun temple which is locateda littleway up in the hillsnearSidonon the AsclepiusRiver.The and dedicatedto Eshmun,the god of Sidon.The Bodashtartinscriptionswere templewas erectedin the 5th centuryBCE found nearthis temple.Photograph of Darel-Machreq Publishers. bypermission
Eshmunazar (KAI#14) The discoveryof the famous Eshmunazar inscription,which has been dated to 451 BCE(Peckham 1968:87),spurred the investigation of Sidon (Jidejian1971:1).It is the second longest extant Phoenician inscriptionafterKaratepe(see below) and according to Gibson (1982:105)"offers an unusually high proportionof literary parallelswith the Hebrew Bible, especially its poetic sections." For example, lines 2-3 quote Eshmunazar,who identifies himself as the son of Tabnitson of as saying "Iwas snatched Eshmunazar,34 before away my time." This phrase includes a Niphal of a root gzl which is cognate to the Hebrew root gzr,the Niphal of which is used in a similarway concerning prematuredeath in Ps 88:6, Isa 53:8,Lam 3:54and Ezek 37:11. This inscriptioncontains a lengthy
set of imprecations against those who might disturbthe grave of this king, who died in the 14th year of his reign. Gibson (1982:105)understands the text as implying that Eshmunazar came to the throneat birthwith his mother actingas regent;thus he would have died at the tender age of 14. A few of the curses have parallelsin the Bible:compare"may they [the grave robbers]have no root below or fruitabove" with Amos 2:9 '1 destroyed his [the Amorite] fruit above and his rootsbelow" (see also Isa 37:31a blessing not a curse!-and Job 18:16). After the maledictions, the inscription switches from first person singular to first person plural and describes how Eshmunazar and his mother Amotashtart rebuilt the temples in and around Sidon, including the Eshmun temple at
Cnydll (see discussion above). It also reportsthat the "lordof kings,"presumably the Persian king, gave them "Dor and Joppa, the rich lands of Dagon (or grainlands) which are in the plain of Sharon, as a reward of the deeds which I did." Galling (1963)proposes that these territorieswere deeded to Sidon in return for the use of its fleet in the war with Greece.Peckham(1968:80,n. 54) suggests that the language may imply that the towns were given in exchangefora "substantial tax paid to the Persian administration.It may be noted that Ezra (7: 21ff.) records such a tax imposed on the Phoeniciansand others (cf.Ezra3:7)." Bodashtart (KAI#15-16) Over twenty virtually identical inscriptions were found on building stones in Biblical 57:1(1994) Archaeologist
11
r~ .
U.=
milkwas unable leastthreerulersof Sidonif notfour(deto succeedto the pendingon whetheror notBaalshillem A16, livedto rule):Baalshillem's throneforsome father,Bac;Ok P od unknownreana,his fatherAbdamun,and his father son. He was Baalshillem. able,however, #0')4t4.jt fr4' to transferthe Tyre ruleto his son, J,? Tyre,todaya smalltown at the end of a Bodashtart (Borpeninsulaon the coastof modem Leba2 lvr~ 1.~Y dreuil1990:94). non, was in ancienttimesan islandcity we may with a sisterfortresson the mainland Therefore theorizethe fol(whichAkkadiantextscalledUshu and "OldTyre,"Katlowingsuccession GreektextsPalaetyrus, of kingsforSidon: zenstein1973:15).Alexanderthe Great, 2 A C Eshmunazar built I, duringhis siegeof Tyrein 333BCE, Tabnit(whomara mole thatattachedthe islandto the K '. <.'k riedhissister, mainland.It is thismole whichhas and formedthe peninsulawherethe modAmotashtart, togethertheybore em town sits today.Themainlandsite Eshmunazar has not been excavated, II),35 of Palaetyrus Eshmunazar but fromancienttextswe know thatit II, and Bodashtart.36 was themainsourceof waterforTyre.37 Bodashtart, then, Theislandcityis listedin Egyptiantexts was Eshmunazar beginningwith the ExecrationTexts of the more than identical inExamples inscriptions twenty nearly II's cousin. and includingthe (18thcenturyBCE)38 scribedon foundation stonesbyBodashtart, of The stones were Sidon. king TellEl-Amamaletters(ca.1350BCE) and orlater.Photopartof the Eshmun templefoundation. Theydateto 451 BCE Baalshillem the storyof Wen-Amon(ANET:25-29). of the Lourve,? PhotoR.M.N. graphbypermission TheBaalshillem Itoccursin thesecond-millennium Kirta and in the inscriptionwas epicfromUgarit(ANET.:145) the Eshmuntemplein the hillsabove foundon the baseof one of the statues Hittiteinvocationto the Cedar-gods Sidon(Bordreuiland Gubel1990:499). of childrenfoundin thecanalof the TheAssyriankingsfrom (ANET:352). All havebeendatedto 451BCE or later Eshmuntemple.Accordingto Gibson Ashurnasirpal II andcontainvariations (1982:114-115), who datestheinscrip(Peckham1968:87) (883-858 BCE) of a formulathatreads:"KingBodash- tionto ca.425BCE, thesestatueswere to Ashurdedicatedto Eshmunandotherdeities tart,kingof the Sidonians,grandsonof banipal (668-627 kingof theSidonians, to securecuresforsickchildren.This kingEshmunazar, builtthistempleforhis god, forEshBCE)list child,Baalshillem, particular happened to be thecrownprinceand thisinscripmun, the holy prince."Sometimesseveraltemplesor shrinesarespecified. tionlistshis genealogyandatteststo at SinceEshmunazar, son of Tabnit,died Onthe base of this lovely statue of the young(seeabove),it is assumedthatthe Eshmunazar of whichBodashtart childBaalshillem,sonof Baana,kingof speaks carvedintinylettersina mustbe the one who was the fatherof Sidon,the inscription Thisisan exampleof Tabnit(KAI#13).In one versionof this singlelineis visible. aboutten suchstatuesof children formula(KAI#16),the phrasewbn?dq buttheonlyone withan ytnmlk,occursbetween"Bodashtart" due, inscription, and "kingof theSidonians." Itis an amto Baalprobably, biguousphrasethateitherdesignates shillembeingthe Bodashtart's unspecifiedsonor hisfather crownprince. as kingof Sidon.Bordreuil(1990:93) Photographby understands thephraseto referto Yatonof permission Darel-Machreq milkas a legitimateheirto the throne: Publishers. "andson of the legitimateYatonmilk." ThisYatonmilk was theyoungerbrother of Tabnitand when his nephew,EshmunazarII,died unexpectedly,Yatont~ir4
Z~?,
12
j
'I
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Tyreas a city bringing them tribute.Tyre is also mentioned in a text of NebuchadIt occurs several nezzar II (605-562 BCE). timesin the Bible.The longestset of references is Ezek 27:1-28:26,entitled a "lament over Tyre,"in which the city is cursed. Greek sources which mention Tyreinclude Herodotus, Diodorus, and Josephus. The site has been excavated, with a few exceptions, only to Greek and Roman levels. There are a few older tombs (IronII),but the magnificence of the Greekand Romanremainsdemands that they be preserved, which hinders furtherexcavation. The modem town covers earlier levels, which also inhibits archaeologicalinquiry.In 1973-1974 there was a small excavation which uncovered twenty-seven archaeological levels extendingdown to the BronzeAge and which has been publishedby Bikai(1976 and 1978).39 S The major resultof this excavation, according to
Bikai,has been to suggest a laterdate for Phoenicianexpansion to the western Mediterranean.40 Forinstance,no archaeologicalevidence supports a date for the founding of Carthage (QartHadast,"New City",a not uncommon name which the Phoenicians gave new emporia) earlier than the last half of the eighth century,almost a century later than Timaeus'traditionaldate of 815 Gras, Rouillard,and Teixidor BCE.41 (1989)disagree.They argue at great length from the ancienttexts fora date in the last quarterof the ninth 4 century BCEfor the founding of . Carthage.42As for Tyreitself, although the latest excavation went down to Bronze Age levels, most of the informationabout the city is derived almost exclusively from ancient texts (Jidejian1969:1-9).Because pre-Greek Tyre,for the most part, has not been excavated, the number of Phoenician texts from Tyreitself (excluding coins) is very limited. Water Spout from Tyre(Cooke #8) One 3rd century BCE inscription,the first found at Tyre (in 1885), is carved on the side of a marble cube-which was formerlypartof a tomb stone (Teixidor1979: 9)-with a 14 cm. diameter hole that served apparentlyas a water spout for a pool of some sort.The inscriptionnames the (two?)sponsorsof the reservoirwhich this spout serviced. The sponsors are each called spt(cp. Hebrew pft,"judge, ruler,"the title given to the heroes of the book of Judges), a politicaloffice whose occupants were, according to Josephus (Ag. Ap. 1.21), the chief magistrates of Tyre in the absence of a king. He lists severalwhose length of servicewas only a few months. Though this inscription is the only mention of sptin Phoeniciaproper,there was at Carthage a similar office, also called ipt, but which, according to Cooke (1903:44),"belonged to a more developed constitution." Teixidor(1979)has a full discussionof thisinscription, with a translationand photograph, wherein he
The Throne of Ashtart (ca. 18"high)from the vicinityof Tyre.The inscriptionis on the edge of the roughyhewn plinth(squareblock)on which the throne itselfsits.Photographby BruceZuckermanof WestSemiticResearch.
concludes that the a local ruler who would govern.ptwas for a short period but who would retain the title after he stepped down. The officewas not hereditary,but some abused the office and in fact kept the officefor life and/or passed it on to theirkin.Finally,Teixidor(1979:17) suggests that it was "an institution similar to that of the laocritesin the Ptolemaic administration." Throne of Ashtart (KAI#17) The Throneof Ashtartis the only Tyrian inscription included in the collections of KAI and Gibson. It "was discovered in or about 1907on a small votive throne built into a stonework building at a site called Khirbetet-Tayibeh,southeast of Ras el-CAin,several kilometers south of Tyre"(Davila and Zuckerman 1993:67). It is a small limestone throne 18 inches high with a sphinx on eitherside. On the back are two stela side by side, each bearing a representationof a male deity, "the figures are doubtless of Baal (Baashamem) and Melcarth,who form with Ashtartethe Tyriantriadof chief deities correspondingto El, Baalat,and Adonis at Byblosand Baal,Astarte,and Eshmun at Sidon"(Gibson1982:116).On the front of the thronethereis a short 2nd century BCEPhoenicianinscription dedicating BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
13
the objectto the goddess Ashtart (BiblicalAshtoreth).Davila and Zuckerman (1993:67)transcribethe text as follows:
This ivory plaque is tiny, only 1 1/2 by 2", and dedicatesa now missingstatueto Tanit/ Ashtart.Itwas discovered at Sareptajust south of Sidonand dates to the 7th cen-
IrbtyI s' trt ?gbgwxl4dx2 ?9ly 3nkCbd-bst bn bdbcl which they translate,
tury BCE. Photograph
by permissionof The Museum. University
To my lady,to cAshtart,who is... which belongs to her/me. I am CAbd"ubasti,son of Bodba cl.43
Sarepta
Ancient Sarepta,modem Sarafand,is located fifteen kilometerssouth of Sidon and has been excavated from 1969 to 1974by the Universityof Pennsylvania under the directionof JamesB. Pritchard. It was a satelliteof Sidon but was nonetheless valued by Sennacherib,like the other Phoeniciancities which he captured in 701 BCE."In1972,a temple was unearthed whose associated archaeological and epigraphicalremains permit it to be identified as the temple of TanitAshtart"(Gras,Rouillard,and Teixidor 1989:43). The Ivory Plaque of Sarepta During Pritchard'sexacavations, he found an inscriptiondating to the 7th century BCE(Gras,Rouillard,and Teixidor 1989:44)that is very important for the history of Phcenicianreligion. It is a small (3.3cm by 5 cm) ivory plaque having a text of 32 letters in four lines that dedicate a statue (not found) to Tanit/ Ashtart: 1hsml3z pC 21slm bn m 3pClbn Czyl 4tnt Cstrt "Thestatue which / sim son of m /
pClson of Czy made for / TanitAshtart. Pritchard(1978:107)suggests two interpretationsof the last line: first, that the two goddesses had come to be identified together-such syncretisms are sug14
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
gested by compounds like Mulk-Ashtart, Eshmun-Ashtart,etc.-or, second (which he considers the more probable of the two), that "thereis an implied conjunction between the two divine names. The dedicationis to Tanit(and) Ashtart, both of whom were served at the same shrine."Another epigraphic discovery at Sareptabore the so-called 'Sign of Tanit'-a triangletopped by a horizontal line which in turn supports a circle.44 This stylized representationof the goddess was incised on a small glass disc (Pritchard1978:108and Gras,Rouillard, and Teixidor1989:45).These discoveries establish the presence of Tanitworship in the Phoenicianhomeland and provide a possible context for "the several condemnations by Hebrew writers of those who 'bum theirsons and their daughters in the fire' (Jer7:31-32, 19: 3-6; 2 Kgs 23:10)..."(Pritchard1978:107). See part two of this article.
Umm el-CAmed The very large site of Umm el-CAmed (ancient Hammon, Peckham 1968:76, n29), which is a short distance to the south of Tyrenear the modem village of Macsub, was partiallyexcavated by the Frenchin the 1940s. A temple was discovered there, the various parts of which the inscriptions dedicate to the male deities Milkashtartand Baalshamem, or to Ashtart. For example, KAI#18 is carved on a squarealabastertype stone and dedicates a gate and doors to Baalshamem.Abedelim made a vow to this god in the district of Laodicea and erected the gate "in the year
180 of the lord of kings, year 143 of the people of Tyre,"i.e., 132 BCE(Donner and R6llig 1973:26).Several inscriptions were purchased from the inhabitantsof Ma csub and others were unearthed in the Frenchexcavations.All sixteen have been gathered together and published by Dunand and Duru (1962 and see Gibson 1982:118).45 Peckham dates all the Umm el-CAmedinscriptions to the third or second century BCE(1968: 76-77,n31). In the next BA:The Phoenician Inscriptions,Part II.
Acknowledgements I would like to Dennis
Pardee,under recognize whose tutelageand with whose indefatigable help this articlewas written.I would also like to thankthe JointDoctoralProgramof the Universityof Denver and the IliffSchoolof Theol-
in procuring ogy fortheirfinancialassistance
the photographsthataccompanythis article.I am gratefulto all the publisherswho graciously allowed me to reproducetheirphotographs.Of these,I would like to singleout Darel-Machreq Publishersof Beirutwho, in spite of the civil unrestand dangerthat plagues theircity, promptlyansweredmy requestin the most generousmannerpossible.
Notes 1Manyof the textswhich this articlediscusses are translatedin Pritchard(1969a),referenceto which is made by the abbreviationANET,followed by a page number.Forthe Egyptian texts see also Lichtheim(1973,1976,& 1980). 2Theterm emporium, i.e., a "portof trade",is used insteadof colony,becauseit more accuratelydescribesthe functionsof these places.
The chief functionwas that of a relaypoint for Phoenicianships as they sailed along the coast, though they also served as "placesof contact between differentethnicgroups"(Gras,Rouillard,and Teixidor1989:109). 3SeeGras,Rouillard,and Teixidor(1989:25-30, 53-69, 239-241),but cf. Naveh (1982:23-42,
53-64). 4Thetranslationis that of Aubreyde S61inTheHistories.Revisedwith an court,Heroditus: introductionand notes by A. R. Burn.Harmondsworth,England:Penguin Books,1972). 5Pettinato(1981:56, 248,253)citingtextTM.75.G. 1376,rev.II 7-1113. 6Forthe historyof Phoenicia,consultMoscati (1965)and Harden(1962). 7Fora convenientdiscussionof the various Semiticlanguagesand theirinterrelationships, see Moscati,et al. (1980:3-21). 8Thisdivision is thatof Segert(1976:27-30). Gibson(1982)and Garbini(1977a:284)have differentschemes. 9Theempiricalevidence for the shift of *// to /s/ is debatableat best. BothinscriptionalHebrew and Phoenicianhave but one grapheme for the phonemes/9/,/9/,and /t/. Sincethe later Hebrew scriptof the Masoretictext distinguishesbetweenthe phonemes/g/and /s/ (by meansof a diacritical markswith one grapheme, see below underScript),it is assumedthatthese two phonemes were distinguishedin pronunciationif not in writingin earlierHebrew.This is supportedby transcriptionsin otherlanguages (Moscati,et al. 1980:35H8.33)and by the fact thatin Hebrew therewas "theoccasional late confusionof spellingbetween [the ' graphemes] (gin)and s (samek),a confusion whichneverarisesin wordswith [thephoneme] /9/, [which]shows that [the phonemes]/g/ (later> /s/) and /s/ were distinctin Jerusalem" (Harris1939:34).The writing of etymological /g/with s being very rarein the Phoenician inscriptions,Harris(1936:22)concludesthat,in Phoenician,/g/had fallen togetherwith /s/, i.e., the two phonemes were no longerdistinguished in pronunciation,and were written with the one graphemes. 10SeeGibson(1982:xvii-xviii),who discusses the Canaaniteshift which he says "iscarried throughinto Phoe[nician]with, as far as we can judge, completeconsistency.It even operates in a numberof cases where the stressed la/ arisesat a much laterstage throughphonologicalchange." "So Segert(1976:142).Ugariticand Akkadian (theS-stem),Imperialand Biblical prefixa & Aramaicprefixan h (theHaphel)while Syriac and PalestinianJewishAramaicuse an (the 3Aphe-l), FormIV of Arabichas an prefix ()afcala),and Hebrewprefixesan h (theHiphfi). a discussionsee Moscati,et al. (1980:125). -These firstthreeexamplesare discussed in Albright(1947:159).
3All of these last Phoenicianwords occurin Hebrew,but they areusually in poeticaltexts and arenot nearlyas numerousas the Hebrew words given. 14Duringthe exile, the Jews abandonedwhat Cross(1979:111) calls the "Israelitenational script"forthe squareAramaicscriptfromwhich developed the scripthe labels "Jewish"(1955: 147,nl). Interestingly,the "Israelitenational script"experienceda resurgenceduring the Maccabeanperiod;Crossrefersto this script as Paleo-Hebrew(1961:189,n4). 15Harris(1936:16-17).He admits that this is an argumentfromsilence.Segert(1976:47,59-60) also assumes this one-to-onecorrespondence which, ultimately,cannotbe proved,but notes (1976:49)that "someshortarchaicPhoenician contain inscriptionsfrom the 12/11th cent.BCE formsof 1 and 3 a littledifferentfromthe usual forms.It is not certainwhetheror not thesesigns are speciallettersfor and // respectively /d_ who considersthe 16Cf.Gelb (1963:122-153), West-Semiticscriptsto be syllabariesprecisely because they do not representvowels. 17Theliteratureon the historyof the alphabet is extensive.Naveh (1982)and McCarter(1975) may be consultedwith profit,especiallyfor the literaturethey cite,but cf. Martin(1961:77-78). A morerecentwork on the originof the alphabet is thatof the FrenchscholarEmilePuech (1986). 18Forthe laterevolutionof the Phoenician scriptssee Peckham(1968). 19Scholarscall this phenomenonscriptio continua. 20Thesiglum KAIfollowed by a numberrefers to the textswith those numbersin Donnerand Rd11ig(1973,1976,and 1979). 21Seethe Yehimilkinscriptiondiscussedbelow and Jidejian(1968:16). the reign of Pepi II (end of the Sixth 22,"Afterand until the TwelfthDynasty,no Dynasty) royal Egyptianinscriptionshave been found at Byblos.It would appearthat during this period of confusioncommercialrelationsbetween Egyptand Bybloswere almost at a standstill"(Jidejian1968:22). 23Thesearetextswrittenin a scriptwhich includes too many signs to be alphabeticand some of which are similarto some Egyptian hieroglyphs.Somehave assumedthatthe language the scriptrecordsis Semiticbut this is not certain(cf.Albright1949).See Mendenhall (1985)and also Martin(1961)for a discussion and an attemptat a full deciphermentof some of this scriptas well as for additionalliterature, but the readershould be awarethatMendenhall's conclusionsare almostuniversally rejectedby the scholarlycommunity. 24UntilTeixidor'snew readingof lpn/gbl, the last six signs were generallyreadas lppsbl.See Teixidor'sdiscussion.
25Poradaproducedseveralart-historicalparallels for the sarcophagussuch as the fringeon the figure'sgarment,the tableand footstool, and the food on the table,thatfor her suggest "adate of 1000BCE.or slightlylater"(1973:363). Gubel (1987:52-53)disagreesstrongly,stating thatthe combinationof a seated king holding a lotus flower in one hand and a drinkingcup in the otherwith a thronesupportedby sphinxes does not occurin the 1st millenniumBCE, whereasthe Megiddo ivoriesprovideparallels that supporta datingof the coffinto "themid 13th-12thcenturiesBCE." 26Itis, in fact,one of four formsin which this name (not all the same person)appearsin the Bible:Hiram,Hifr6m,and Hirarm.Hifrm and HuIra-m appearas Kethiband Qere,variantsof the name of the king of Tyrein 1 Chr 14:1and 2 Chr9:10. 27Yehimilk"rebuilt"(bny)the temple and "restored(hwy)all the ruins,"a word pair which occursin 1 Chr 11:8.Bothtexts show the peculiarspecializeduse of hyy meaning "rebuild"(Avishur1976:12-13). 28TheEgyptiandates are fromKitchen(1973). 29Seealso ANET:263-264. 3?Fora restorationof the statuewith the inscriptionsee Dussaud (1924:145,fig. 5) who also has photographof a squeeze of the text, PlateXLII. alsoplacesAbibaalbetween (1946:14) 31Albright Yehimilkand Elibaal. 32Moscati(1965:10-11)sees it differently.He arguesfor the following succession:Ahiram (ca. 1000 BCE),Ittobaal (ca. 980 BCE),Abibaal (ca. 940 BCE),Yehimilk (ca. 920 BCE),Elibaal (ca. 900 BCE),and Shipitbaal (ca. 880 BCE);he does not
mentionthe Josephustexts.Donnerand R611ig (1973:9)have yet a differentsuccession:Ahiram (ca. 1000 BCE),Ittobaal (ca. 975 BCE), Yehimilk (ca. 950 BCE),Abibaal (ca. 930 BCE), Elibaal (ca. 900 BCE),and Shipitbaal (ca. 880 BCE).
Herrmann(1958:21)has the same orderwith slightlydifferentdates. 33Yeivinbelieves thatgold leaf over the stelais intended (1974:19). 3KAI#13 is an inscriptionof this Tabnitson of describesboth which,interestingly, Eshmunazar, Tabnitand his fatheras priestsof Ashtartas well as kings of Sidon. 35Lines13-15 of Eshmunazar'sinscription (KAI#14) statethatEshmunazarwas the "son of KingTabnit,king of the Sidonians,"who in turnwas the son of "KingEshmunazar,king of the Sidonians"and thatEshmunazar's mother,Amotashtart,was "daughterof King Eshmunazar,king of the Sidonians." 36Bordreuil (1990:94)also makes referenceto anothertext(CIS1,4)which presentsa "Bodashtartkingof theSidonians"as theson of "Bodashtartking of the Sidonians."He identifiesthis lastBodashtartwith the son of Yatonmilkof our inscriptions.He thus adds a BodashtartII to
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
15
this list of Sidoniankings. See also the discussion of the genealogyand successionin Donner and R6llig(1973:21-22)and Peckham (1968:75-87). 37Evidenceforthis datesbackto the fourteenth and thirteenthcenturies:El Amarnaletters 148:8-13,26-34; 149:49-53;150:14-21(cf. also letters146-147,151,154-155);PapyrusAnastasi I fromthe NineteenthDynastyof Egypt containsthis (end of the 13thcenturyBCE.) aboutTyreand Ushu (calledUzu in Egyptian texts):"Whatis Uzu like?They say another town is in the sea, named Tyre-the-Port. Water is taken(to) it by the boats,and it is richerin fish thanthe sands"(ANET:477). 38TheseareMiddle KingdomEgyptiantexts in which the names of enemies were recorded on potteryfigurinesand bowls which were then shatteredthus breakingthe power of those enemies (ANET:328-329). 39Seealso Gras,Rouillard,and Teixidor (1989:46). 4?Bikai(1978:48)states,"'TheIronAge levelsat Tyrecanbe dividedinto two majorpotteryperiods":an earlierone datedto ca. 1050to ca. 760 and a laterone dated to ca. 760 to ca. 700 BCE. "AtTyre,this late Phoeniciancomplexwas BCE. concentratedin a few strata(IVto I)..." (1978: 48). She concludes(1978:54)that, "thevast majorityof the parallels[at othersites] to the potterycomplexof TyreStrataIV to I and particularlyIll to II areconcentratedin a groupof relatedstrata...theweight of the evidence attestsa life span of ca. 760 to ca. 700 BCE for this [pottery]complex."It is potteryof this latercomplexwhich is found in the Phoenician coloniesin the west, fromwhich the Punic potterydevelops. As a rule,earlierPhoenician potteryis not found in the colonies(with the exceptionof Kitionon Cypruswhich "suggests thatit is earlierthan the othercolonies"), at leastnot in significantquantities,which forcesBikaito push for a laterdate for Phoenician colonization. 41 the Greekhistorianof the fourth "Timnaus, recordsthatCarthagewas founded centuryBCE, by Elissa,sisterof King Pygmalion,afterher husbandhad been killed on the king'sorders. Some Tyriansaresupposed to have accompanied the princess,and aftermany adventures and trials,they reachedLibyaand founded a city.The local inhabitantscalledElissa'Deido' when she becamequeen.Theseeventsaresaid to have takenplace38 yearsbeforethe First Olympiad,thatis in 814or 813 BCE E (Timamus, 23)"(Picardand Picard1968:30).Liver(1953) date for the foundingof arguesfora 825 BCE Carthagebasedon a synchronismbetweenJehu of Israel,BalezorosIIof Tyre,and Shalmaneser IIIin 841 BCE and the traditionof Pompeius Trogus(whichis found in Justinus: EpitomePompeiTrogi18,6, 9). Albright(1955) disputesLiver'sreconstruction. Accordingto "theearliestarchaeoStagerand Wolff(1984:36), logicalevidenceforthe occupationof Carthage
16
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
goes back to about750 BCE."/ 42Gras,Rouillard,Teixidor(1989:45-48and if one wants to retain 198-207):"Therefore, somethingof the literarytradition,an answer is imposed:Carthagewas founded beforethe end of the IXthcentury,around814 if one makes a symbolicdate of this figure,in any case not after800;"(1989:206). 43SeeDavilaand Zuckerman1993for a complete discussionincludingan epigraphicand palaeographiccommentary.The articlealso includessome closeup photographsof the inscriptionitself.The two lettersinscribed,x1 and x2,areunclear,and the word was left untranslated. 44Thisemblemhas also been found at Acco on a potsherd(Dothan1974:44-49, P1.9) and off the coast of Haifaon some terracottafigurines salvaged fromthe wreckof a fifthcentury ship (Linder1973:182-87). 45Pardeegives the text and translationof six of them which containthe name of the god Milkashtartin his discussionof thatname's meaning (1988:55-57).
Bibliography Albright,W. E 1939 An AramaeanMagicalTextin Hebrew fromthe SeventhCenturyB.C.Bulletinof theAmericanSchoolsof Oriental Research 76:5-11. 1945 An IndirectSynchronismbetween Egyptand Mesopotamiaca. 1730B.C. Bulletinof theAmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch 99:9-18. 1946 MoreBooksand JournalsReceived fromAbroad.Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof OrientalResearch 103:14-15. 1947 The PhcenicianInscriptionsof the TenthCentury.Journalof theAmerican OrientalSociety67:153-160. 1949 The So-CalledEnigmaticInscriptions from Byblus.Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof OrientalResearch 116:12-14. 1955 The New Assyro-TyrianSynchronism and the Chronologyof Tyre.Melanges IsidoreLAvy,AnnuairedeI'Institutde et Philologieet d'HistoireOrientales Slaves13:1-9. Astour,M. C. 1965 The Originof the Terms'Canaan,' 'Phoenician,'and 'Purple.'Journalof NearEasternStudies24:346-50.
Fifth-century Middle Phoencian inscription fromthe Eshmuntemple nearSidon.Withits 22 and the Aramaeansfor theirlanguages. signs, the Phoencianscriptwas borrowedby the Israelites TheGreekstransformedthe scriptby usingsome of its distinctivesigns to representvowels.The Greekalphabetwas borrowedby the Latinsand thus becamethe alphabetof the westernworld. Photograph courtesyof the Lourve,@PhotoR.M.N.
p~'~c
~j~g~` `~`?a~lL~ZIP~t~ 1'
.?s':*i l.,~~U~
~L'~A~P
)L.\Z~pr--CE.-
Thefirst attempt at the inscriptionon the 5thcenturyBCEa of Eshmunazar sarcophagus wasabandoned aftera few linesbecauseof too manymistakes. of Photograph bypermission the Lourve,@PhotoR.M.N. Avishur,Y. 1976 Studiesof StylisticFeaturesCommon to the PhcenicianInscriptionsand the Bible.Ugaritische 8:1-22. Forschungen Bikai,P M. 1976 Tyre:Reportofan Excavation, 1973-1974. UnpublishedPh.D.dissertation.Berkeley:GraduateTheologicalUnion = ThePotteryof Tyre.Warminster: Aris & Phillips,1978. 1978 The LatePhoenicianPotteryComplex and Chronology.Bulletinof the American Schoolsof OrientalResearch 229:48-56. Bordreuil,P. 1982 Epigraphesph6niciennessur bronze, sur pierreet sur c6ramique.Pp. 187192 in Archdologie au Levant:Recueilia de RogerSaideh,Collection la memoire de la Maisonde l'OrientM6diterran6en,no. 12,S6rieArcheologique,9. Lyon:Maisonde l'Orient. 1990 A proposde la g6n6alogiede Bodachtart.Transeuphratene 3:93-94. Bordreuil,P.and Gubel,E. 1990 Bulletind'antiquit&s arch6ologiques du Levantin6ditesou meconnuesVI. Syria67/2 (1990):483-520.
CAD 1955 TheAssyrianDictionaryof theOriental Instituteof theUniversityof Chicago. CIS 1881 CorpusInscriptionum Pars Semiticarum, PrimaInscriptiones ContiPhcenicias nens.Paris. Cooke,G. 1903 A Text-Book of NorthSemiticInscriptions:Moabite,Hebrew,Phoenician, Aramaic,Nabatmean, Palmyrene, Jewish. Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Cross,E M.,Jr. 1954 The Evolutionof the Proto-Canaanite Alphabet.Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof OrientalResearch 134:15-24. 1955 The Oldest ManuscriptsfromQumran.Journalof BiblicalLiterature 74(1955):147-172. 1961 TheDevelopmentof theJewishScripts. Pp.133-202in TheBibleandthe AncientNearEast:Essaysin honorof WilliamFoxwellAlbright.Editedby G. ErnestWright.The BiblicalColloquium, 1961:reprinted.,WinonaLake, Indiana:Eisenbrauns,1979. 1979 EarlyAlphabeticScripts.Pp. 97-123 in SymposiaCelebrating theSeventyFifthAnniversary of theFoundingof the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch
(1900-1975).Editedby FrankMoore Cross.Cambridge:AmericanSchools of OrientalResearch. Donner,H. and R611ig, W 1973 Kanaaniische undaramirische Inschriften. Mit einem Beitragvon 0. Rbssler. Band2: Kommentar.3rd ed. Wiesbaden:Otto Harrassowitz. 1976 Kanaandische undaramiiische Inschriften. Mit einem Beitragvon 0. R6ssler. Band3: Glossare,Indizes,Tafeln.4th ed. Wiesbaden:Otto Harrassowitz. 1979 Kanaaniische undaramiiische Inschriften. Mit einem Beitragvon O. R6ssler. Band 1:Texte.4th ed. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Dothan,M. 1974 A Sign of TanitfromTel CAkko,Israel Journal24:44-49,P1.9:A Exploration Dunand,M. 1945 BybliaGrammata. Beirut:no publisher given. Dunand, M. and Duru,R. 1962 Oummel-CAmed: UneVillede l'Epoque aux Echellesde Tyr.Paris. hellinistique Eiselen,E C. 1907 Sidon:A Studyin OrientalHistory. ColumbiaUniversityOrientalStudes, Vol.IV.New York:The Columbia UniversityPress. Galling,K. 1963 Eschmunazarund der Herrder desdeutschen K6nige,Zeitschrift 79:140-151. Paldistina-Vereins Garbini,G. 1977a I dialettidel fenicio.Annalidell'istituto orientalidi Napoli37:283-294. 1977b Sulla datazionedell' iscrizionedi Ahiram.Annalidell'istituto orientalidi Napoli37:81-89. Gelb, I.J. 1963 A Studyof Writing.Revisedand edited. Chicago:The Universityof ChicagoPress. Gibson,J.C. L. 1982 Textbook of SyrianSemiticInscriptions. Vol.III. IncludInscriptions Phoenician in theMixedDialectof ing Inscriptions ArslanTash.Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press. Gras,M., Rouillard,P.,and Teixidor,J. 1989 L'univers Paris:Arthaud. phdnicien. Greenstein,E. L. 1976 A in PhoenicianInscription Ugaritic Script?JournaloftheAncientNearEasternSocietyofColumbiaUniversity 8:49-57. Gubel,E. 1987 Phwnician Furniture: A Typology based on IronAgeRepresentations withReferenceto theIconographical Context.Studia PhoeniciaVII.Leuven:Uitgeverij Peeters. Hachmann,R. 1967 Das K6nigsgrabV von Jebeil(Byblos), Untersuchungenzur Zeitstellung des sogen. Ahiram-Grabes.
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
17
Istanbuler Deutsches Mitteilungen, ArchiiologischesInstitut,Abteilung Istanbul17:93-114. Harden,D. 1962 ThePhacnicians. London:Penguin Books. Harris,Z. S. 1936 A Grammar of thePhaenician Language. AmericanOrientalSeries,vol. 8. New Haven,Connecticut:AmericanOrientalSociety. 1939 Development Dialects: of theCanaanite An Investigation in LinguisticHistory. AmericanOrientalSeries,vol. 16. New Haven, Connecticut:American OrientalSociety. Heroditus 1972 TheHistories.Rev.with an Introduction by A.R.Bum. Harmondsworth, England:PenguinBooks. Herrmann,W. 1958 Der historischeErtragder altbyblischen Kdnigsinscbriften. Mitteilungen desInstitutsfir Orientforschung 6:14-32.
S. Irwy,
1961 New Evidencefor Belomancyin AncientPalestineand Phcenicia.Journalof theAmericanOrientalSociety 81:27-34.
N. Jidejian,
1968 ByblosThroughtheAges.Witha Foreword by M. Dunand.Beirut:Dar elMachreqPublishers. 1969 TyreThroughtheAges.Witha Foreword by EmirM. Ch6hab.Beirut:Dar el-MachreqPublishers. 1971 SidonThroughtheAges.Witha Foreword by M. Dunand.Beirut:Dar elMachreqPublishers. Katzenstein,H. J. 1973 TheHistoryof Tyre:FromtheBeginning of theSecondMilleniumB.C.E.untilthe Fallof theNeo-Babylonian Empirein 538 B.C.E.Jerusalem:The SchockenInstitute for JewishResearchof the Jewish TheologicalSeminaryof America. Kitchen,K. A. 1973 TheThirdIntermediate PeriodIn Egypt (1100-650B.C.).Wanninster,England: Aris & PhillipsLtd. KTU 1976 Dietrich,M., Loretz,O., and Sanmartin,J.Diekeilalphabetischen Texteaus erkeilalphabetischen Ugarit:Einschlieftlich Texteauflerhalb Ugarits,Teil1:Transkripion.AlterOrientund AltesTestament, Band24.Neukirchen-Vluyn:NeukirchenerVerlagdes Erziehungsvereins GmbH. Lemaire,A. 1989 Nouvelle Pointede Flbhe Inscrite e Proto-Ph6nicienne. StudiEpigrafici sul VicinoOrienteAntico Linguistici 6(1989):53-56. Lichtheim,M. 1973 AncientEgyptianLiterature: A Bookof Readings.Vol.1: TheOldandMiddle
18
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Kingdoms. Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress. 1976 AncientEgyptianLiterature: A Bookof Readings.Vol.2: TheNew Kingdom. Berkeley:Universityof California Press. 1980 AncientEgyptianLiterature: A Bookof Readings.Vol.3: TheLatePeriod.Berkeley: Universityof CaliforniaPress. Linder,E. 1973 A Cargoof Phoenicio-Punic Figurines.Archaxology 26:182-87 Liver,J. 1953 The Chronologyof Tyreat the Beginning of the FirstMillenniumB.C. IsraelExploration Journal3:113-120. Martin,M. 1961 A PreliminaryReportafterRe-Examination of the ByblianInscriptions. Orientalia 30:46-78. McCarter,P.K. 1975 TheAntiquityof theGreekAlphabet and theEarlyPhcenician Scripts.Harvard SemiticMonographs,no. 9. Missoula, Montana:ScholarsPress. G. E. Mendenrhall, 1985 TheSyllabicInscriptions fromByblos. Beirut,Lebanon:AmericanUniversity of Beirut. Milik,J.T.,and Cross,E M. 1956 A TypologicalStudy of the El Khadr Javelin-and Arrow-heads.Annualof theDepartment ofAntiquitiesofJordan 3:15-23. Montet,P 1928 Bybloset L'Egypte: Quatrescampagnes defouillesa Gebeil1921-1922-19231924.Biblioth&que Arch6ologiqueet HistoriqueXI.Paris:LibrairieOrientalistePaul Beuthner,1928(Texte), 1929(Atlas). Moorey,P R. S. 1971 Catalogue of theAncient PersianBronzesin the
The diminutive Throne of Ashtart showingthe sphinxon its left side. Photographbypermissionof the Lourve, @PhotoR.M.N.
Ashmolean Museum.Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress. 1974 AncientPersianBronzesin theAdam Collection. London:Faber& Faber. Moscati,S. 1965 TheWorldof thePhxnicians,Translated by A. Hamilton.London:Weidenfeld and Nicolson [English Translation19681. Moscati,S., et al. 1980 An Introduction to theComparative PhonoftheSemiticLanguages: Grammar PortaLinguaologyandMorphology. rum OrientaliumVI.Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
J.D. Muhly,
1970 Homer and the Phoenicians:The Relations between Greeceand the Near Eastin the LateBronzeand Early IronAges. Berytus19(1970):19-64. Naveh, J. 1982 EarlyHistoryof theAlphabet: An Introand ductionto WestSemiticEpigraphy Jerusalem:The Magness Palaeography. Press. Pardee,D. 1988 A New Datum for the Mean-
ing of the Divine Name Milkashtart. Pp. 55-67in Ascribeto theLord:Biblical & otherstudiesin memoryofPeter Craigie.Editedby L. Eslinger& G. Taylor.Journalfor the Study of the Old TestamentSupplementSeries, no. 67. Sheffield:JSOTPress.
Peckham, IJ.B.
1968 TheDevelopment of theLatePhcenician Scripts.Cambridge,Massachusetts: HarvardUniversityPress. Pettinato,G. 1981 TheArchivesof Ebla:An Empire in Clay.Afterwordby M. Inscribed Dahood,S. J.GardenCity,New York: Doubleday& Company,Inc. Picard,G. C., and Picard,C. A Sur1968 TheLifeandDeathof Carthage: veyofPunicHistoryandCulturefrom Translated its Birthto theFinalTragedy. from the Frenchby D. Collon.New York:TaplingerPublishingCo. Porada,E. 1973 Notes on the Sarcophagusof Ahiram. Journalof theAncientNearEasternSocietyof ColumbiaUniversity5:354-372. Pritchard,J.B., ed. 1969a AncientNearEasternTextsRelatingto 3rd ed. with suptheOldTestament. plement.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress. 1969b TheAncientNearEastin PicturesRelat2nd ed. with ing to theOldTestament. supplement.Princeton:Princeton UniversityPress. Puech,E. 1986 Originede l'Alphabet:Documentsen alphabetlineaireet cundiformedu IIe 93:161-213. mill6naire.RevueBiblique Sader,H. 1990 Deux pigraphesPheniciennes in6dites.Syria67/2:315-322. Sasson,J.M. 1984 The EarliestMentionof the Name 47:90. Canaan.BiblicalArchteologist Segert,S. andPunic. 1976 A Grammar of Phcenician Miinchen:C. H. Beck. Speiser,E. A. 1936 The Name Phoinikes.Language 12:121-26. Stager,L. A. and Wolff,S. R. 1984 Child Sacrificeat Carthage--Religious Riteor PopulationControl? BiblicalArchaologyReview10/1:30-51. Sznycer,M. 1967 LesPassagespuniquesen transcription latinedansle
dePlaute. Paris. Teixidor,J. 1979 Les fonctionsde RABet de suffbteen Ph6nicie.Semitica29:9-17. Nouveau. 1987 Ul'Inscription d'Ah•irami Syria64:137-140. Yeivin,S. 1974 CEdtth.IsraelExploration Journal 24:17-20.
" Thisis oneof thosemonumental
thatwillmakehistory. publications essentialreference It is an absolutely workin anyarchaeological library, orprivate.Butit will institutional alsoprovidemanyhappyhoursof browsingfor theaficionado." --Biblical ArchaeologyReview (Nov/Dec 1993)
Mh :R 3 NWl E FROi M0 []
Foundationsfor a BetterUnderstand-
ing of Religious Developments Armin Lange Computer Aided Text-Recon-
struction and Transcription CATT-Manual
'"
with an Introductionby HermannLichtenbergerand an Appendixby TimothyDoherty
I1•THE,
Thisworkpresentsa newwayof damagedmanuscripts, reconstructing
pFD?i•IA
ENCYCL [-f
kJto
inscriptions,and earlyprintsusing recentlydeveloped- image editing- soft-
06
ware. The method
called CATT has
been developed on the Dead Sea Scrolls,but can be used for any damaged text. Up until now only highly specializedcomputerexperts were able to use image editing programs for this purpose,because the method of CATTwas not documented in the manuals of the programsin question.The presentwork describes how to use three of the most important image editing programsfor this purpose:PhotoTouch(Logitech), PhotoStyler(Aldus),and Picture Publisher(Micrografx). 1993.200 pages (est.).ISBN3-16ARCHAEOLOGICAL 146149-5paper $ 31.00 (est.)
THENEW
OF ENCYCLOPEDIA IN EXCAVATIONS THEHOLYLAND
- November
Rainer Riesner Die Friihzeit des Apostels Paulus
Studienzur Chronologie,Missionsstrategieund Theologie Paulinechronology is the backbone of earlyChristianhistory.The author criticallyexamines new chronologies, pleading for a returnto the relative scholarlyconsensus preceding 1980. The hints on chronology and mission strategyin the lettersof Paulconfirm in general the frameworkof the Acts of the Apostels.Thessalonians1 is to be dated 50 AD and not earlier.Its special characteris due not to a different, earlierPauline theology but to historical circumstances. 1993.462 pages (est.) (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungenzum Neuen Testament).ISBN3-16-145828-1cloth
Editor:EphraimStern,
HebrewUniversity ofJerusalem
AssistantEditor:AyeletGilboa,
HebrewUniversity of erusalem
EditorialDirector:JosephAviram,
IsraelExploration Society D evisedandupdated,thisis the new edition of theclassicin thisfield. thiscomprehenalphabetically, Organized morethan andanalyzes siveworkdescribes in thearea excavations 420archaeological and thatincludesIsrael,ancientPalestine, andtheSinai partsof Syria,Jordan, Peninsula.
$ 92.50 (est.) - December
4 volumes * 368 articles - 205 contributors 9 x 12 * 1552 pages * 2000 * illustrations two-color throughout 64 pages full color 1993 ISBN: 0-13-276288-9? $355? July
ARTI US
ACADEMIC SIMON &SCHUSTER REFERENCE DIVISION A ParamountCommunicationsCompany
15 ColumbusCircle,26th Floor New York,NY 10023
I86
J.C.B.MOHR * IiiM' (PAUL SIEBECK) I1M?W TUBINGEN
QUESTIONS?Call us at (212) 373-7353
57:1 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
19
SI
* Ugai
SI
thefirstdecadeofexcava- pipes, which Schaefferinterpretedas
During tion at Ugarit and its port city
of Minet el-Beida (1929-1939), Claude Schaefferdiscovered dozens of vaulted-chamber tombs built under the floorsof houses in the residentialsections of both sites. Designed to hold multiple burials, they were clearly family tombs. Schaefferalso found a variety of interesting constructions in and around the tombs, which he interpretedas funerary installations for providing periodic offerings of drink and food for the dead. Some of the installationswere located within the tombs, such as pits or jarsset in the chamber floor,and niches in the walls where lamps or other offerings could be placed. Other featuressuggested that regular postfuneral offerings for the dead were made from the room that covered the tomb. There were tombs that had holes in their ceiling or walls, and in the rooms above the tomb chambers there were various pits, gutters, and ceramic
20
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
the remains of a complex system of devices used in the cult of the dead. While the scholarly study of ancient Canaanite and Israelitebeliefs concerning the afterlifeand carefor the dead has been dominated (quite naturally) by examinationof the literaryremainsfrom Syria-Palestine,especially the Ugaritic tabletsand the Bible,the tombs of Ugarit have played a small, but significantrole, particularlyin the discussion of funerary rites and cult of the dead. In fact, they have been the primary paradigm of archaeologicalevidence related to the cult of the dead in Syria-Palestine.No other collection of tombs in the Levant exhibited such extensive remains of installations for the regular provision of drink and food for the dead as those described by Schaeffer.Over a half century later,Schaeffer'sinterpretationsof the tombs continue to be quoted and used either to illuminate certain passages in the Ugaritictexts or to illustrate
how the archaeologicalevidence confirmnns that there was a substantial concern at Ugarit for providing the dead with nourishment. By extension, the tombs have played a significantcomparative role in the reconstructionof Israelite concepts of death and afterlife,in much the same way that Ugaritic literature has been used. To date, the tombs of Ugarit have never been given a detailed analysis. The only attempt at a serious synthesis of the excavatedmaterialwas published in 1939by Schaeffer(1939b:53-106), supplemented by a summary of his views on the cult of the dead at Ugarit in the Schweich Lecturesgiven in 1936 (1939a: 46-56). Yet none of the tombs upon which these studies were based was ever fully published. Some of them received brief descriptions in the preliminary excavation reports that appeared in the journal,Syria,but these are of limited value. Plans and photographs of a few were provided, along with examples of
The bay at Minet el-Beida, the portof ancient Ugarit.Inthe foregroundthe excavatedareaof the harbortown; in the background,overlooking the white cliffsof the bay,the JebelAkra.
. ; ,? ? r.,, .,
re Pl_
pottery and small objectsfor some, but only rarelycan a picture of the overall characteristicsof an individual tomb be recovered. Thus little attempt has been made to evaluate Schaeffer'sinterpretations, and most often his descriptions of the tombs and their cultic installations are simply repeated (for example, Wdichter1967:184;Ribar 1973:48-50;de Moor 1976:331;Pitard1978:71-72; Spronk 1986:142-45;Lewis 1989:97-98). In spite of this, some substantial progressin understandingaspects of the tombs of Ugarit has been made during the last decade under the auspices of the currentexcavation team working at the site. In 1983,J.Margueronpublished an important study of the tomb found in a large house (the "GrandBatiment") excavated in 1976,in which he reevaluated the functions of some of the ritual installationsfound within it. Aspects of the relationshipbetween the tombs and the houses within which they were built were explored by O. Callot (1983).
sometimesinto a stone or concretedbasin which would overflow into the vertical pipe). The water would travel down the pipe, into the gutter and over to the undergroundpit, where the dead would presumably find it. (2) Openings in the walls of some tombs, which he called "windows."Many of these were like the niches regularlyfound in the tomb walls, except that the backs of the "windows" were not sealed with a stone. He believed that they allowed the dead access from the interiorof the tomb to the water pits just described. In a few tombs, a jar was set just outside a "window,"its mouth flushwith the floorof the window. (3) Holes in the ceilings of some tomb chambers,throughwhich one could drop the offerings from the room above. In view of all these installations,Schaeffer was convinced that therewas a "highly complicated cult of the dead" at Ugarit,
J.-ESalles has examined the diachronic development of tomb types at Ugarit (1987)as a preliminaryto a much larger scale study of the tombs. In light of our improved understandingof BronzeAge Syria and of funerarypractices in the Levant, a reevaluation of some of Schaeffer's ideas concerning the tombs at Ugarit seems appropriate.Despite the scantness of the published data about the tombs, enough evidence can be recovered to test some of Schaeffer's conclusions. In this article,I want to examine Schaeffer'sinterpretationof the so-called libation installations that were found outside the tombs or incorporatedinto their externalstructure. Shamra) SUgart(Ras These were identifiedas part of a system of regular, post-funeralprovision of water and/or food to the Cyprus dead from the room above the tomb chamber.1 Tripoli Almost all of the relevant (Byb"os) GUbla tombs were discovered Beirut during the first eleven seaSidone sons of work at Ugarit, Sarepta~ between 1929 and 1939.2 . Tyre, el Schaefferpublished only cAmed Urn . one general discussion of his views on these libation systems, the (Schaeffer 1939a:49-56),but numerH RASSHAbRA ous individual examples Harbor town of these installations were described in the excavation reports.In the Schweich Lectures(1939a:50-51), Schaefferdescribed the different types centered on the provision of drinking of libationinstallationsthat he had water to the deceased in their tombs found around the tombs and discussed (1939a:18). their functions. He mentioned the folHowever, thereare serious problems with located Schaeffer'sinterpretationsof the (1) lowing: Underground pits, beside tombs and provided with water archaeologicalremains as funerary a of vertical installations (including both the pubthrough system pipes and/ or horizontalgutters.The libatorwould lished plans and photographs and the verbal descriptions in the preliminary pour water into the vertical pipe (or BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
21
..L
o .
? IL
Exampleof a basin with a drainfor overFrom Schaeffer flow, fromMinetel-Beida.
An example of a proposed libationpit witha stonegutterleadingto the pit,from Schaeffer didnotindicate Minetel-Beida. betweenthis the exactspatialrelationship
1931:pl. XV, 71.
pit and any tomb at the site. FromSchaeffer 1931:pl.XIV,2.
... -.;.•r
~ .!
?t
,
",4 ?
4?
. .
• .-Li
: ,,
"
.i
The "votivecascade"from Minetel-Beida.Notehowthe drainsappearto be builtintoand water as two phasesof a drainage systemforremoving piercea wall.Theyarebetterinterpreted from insidea house to the outdoors.FromSchaeffer1929:pl. LV2
reports).A surveyof the varioustypes of installationsthathe identifiedwill makethe point. Libation Pits Themostcommontype of funeraryinthatSchaeffer describedarelibastallation tionpitslocatednearthe tombs,which 22
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
haveeitherstoneguttersorceramiccylindricalpipes leadingto theirorifices. Schaeffer reportedarea varietyof styles. Somearesimplycomposedof a horizontalstonegutterleadingto a pit (e.g. 1931:1-2; pl. XIV:2;1).Others(e.g.,1931: 2) havea basinwhere,accordpl. XIMV:I1; thelibation ing to Schaeffer(1939a:50),
was poureduntilit overflowedintothe gutterordrainandfromthereintothepit. Stillothershavea verticalpipethatled to the morehorizontalgutter(cf.1933: 106-107,pl. IX,4, thoughthisone is connectedto fertilitylibations[alsoin cf. 50],sinceit was Schaeffer1939a:47; foundin a complexwith no related tombs).Suchpipes would be similarto theMesopotamian aratu-pipes(Sjdberg whichwere used to provide 1965:63-4), waterto the dead.One is describedas a "votivecascade"(Schaeffer 1929290-91, 3), in pl. LV,2;also Schaeffer1939a:50. whichtwo superimposedguttersdirected waterto a jarat the spoutof the lowerone, whichthenoverflowedinto a piercedstonethatlay on the ground. A largenumberof theselibationpits werefoundat Minetel-Beida,theharbor town for Ugarit,duringthe firstfour seasonsof excavation, andtheidentificationof theseconstructionsas libation pits was madeon thebasisof the finds there.Similartombsand installations werenotdiscoveredat Ugarititselfuntil the fourthseason.Manyof the pits at Minetel-Beidawere located,not beside the tombs,but withinbuildingsthat Schaefferidentifiedas shrinesforeither a fertilitycultor forthecultof thedead. Infact,duringthesecondthroughfourth seasonsof excavation,manymorepits werefoundin these "cultbuildings" thannearthe tombs.Similarpits and gutterswere foundat Ugaritbetween thefourthand ninthseasons.Theexcavationreportsdescribedfourtombsat Tombs Ugaritwith such installations: and II,IV,L, LVI.3 of identification However,Schaeffer's the installationsas libationpits related to the tombs(orto fertilityritesin the case of the pits foundaway fromthe tombs) must be rejected.A carefulreading of the excavationreportsshows that this interpretationwas based on the initial understanding of the site of Minet el-Beidathat Schaefferheld during the firstfive seasons of the excavations(192934). At that time, Schaefferbelieved that he was digging in a large necropolis thatbelonged to the nearbycity of Ugarit (see, e.g. 1929:286; 1931:1-2; 1932:1014; 1933:96; 1934:105).His assumption was natural, since the discovery that
0
7ir-
'a II 7-V
-'
'In.....
04%'
K
;
.qitt
-t?
-'
.
1\
ir
rC -.Nk--
TO-WOO~ p
..
r
'V
IIV.
a
-
--'
..
?
Ik ,;~V r
??
.-
~v ~j~?
?-,-. i?09"
Ile '4f
?? rr
~cPAQ
"'44
.ww~a
-V
t'e
had led Schaefferto beginexcavating Minetel-Beidawas thatof a LateBronze Age tomb.Therewas no reasonin 1929 to suspectthatthe tombsat MinetelBeidamightbe locatedinsidehouses, wasvirtually sincesuchan arrangement unknownforLateBronzeAge Syriaat thetime(thisis stilleffectivelythecase). Butin factSchaefferwas excavatingthe harbortown,in the midstof dwellings, shops,and storehouses,not a cemetery at all.Duringthe firstfive seasonshe simplydid not realizethisand thereforedid not expectto findanydomestic or commercialstructuresor artifactsin his excavation.Thismisunderstanding to misintercausedSchaeffer consistently almost found around he everything pret the tombs.Thusdwellingsand storehouseswereidentifiedas cultshrines.4 Roomsin storehousesfilledwith storejarswereinterpretedas giantvotive-
,
'4
"4eat
pl. 1, 3; offeringchambers( 1932:4-5; 1931:3-4), stairwaysin the houseswere identifiedas steppedaltars pl.1,3; (1931"2; 1932:4),wallsof the roomssurrounding the tombswereidentifiedas endoAlmosteverything surewalls( 1934:114). foundat Minetel-Beidaduringthe first five seasonswas connectedto the cult of the dead or to a fertilitycult,because Schaefferthoughthe was excavatinga cemeteryratherthana town. When,duringthe sixthand seventhseasons,it becamedear to Schaefferthattherewas no necropolisas such at Minetel-Beida(thediscoveryof vaulted-chamber tombsundermostof the housesat Ugaritmadethatclear), Schaeffer beganto referto Minetel-Beida as a harbortown.5However,as faras I havefound,he neversystematicallyreof the earlier vised his interpretations findsin print,so thatwhilesomeobvious
7,
L.
Drainthrough the wall of HouseA (from Calvetand Geyer1987:140,fig. 7). Note its simi-
larityto the "votivecascade."
were aspectsof his earlyinterpretation changed,otherswereneverreanalyzed. Thusthebuildingthatwas describedin 1932as a vast mortuaryconstructionof roomswithstairedaltars,pitsfilledwith andlibationtableswith ceramicofferings, channels(1932:4-5), appearsas a wareand thereare housein 1939(1939a:19),6 to suchculticbuildno furtherreferences did notsignificantly ings.ButSchaeffer changehis views on theindividuallibathathe hadidentified tioninstallations the aroundthetombs,andhe interpreted tombsof Ugaritin muchthesameway he had thoseat Minetel-Beida. Oncethebuildingsat Minetel-Beida arerecognizedas secularstructures, i.e., BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
23
r jr
90,
A.?
49F?
0.ru
if "It ix-~
houses, shops, and storehouses,then the occurrenceof pits with guttersand channels becomes fully intelligible. Recent studies of Ugariticarchitecturehave illuminated the use of water and systems for retainingand dischargingit at Ugarit (Calvet 1981;Callot 1983:esp.31-33;65; Calvet and Geyer 1987),and it is clear that Schaeffer'slibation pits are better identified as ordinary utilitariansumps for disposing of water inside the house, latrines,drainagesystems from the roofs of the buildings, and the like. Recent excavations have uncovered similar installations in various rooms and courtyards, and the excavatorshave shown them to be means of evacuating water from the house.7 Evidence for such a drain system was found, for example, in House A during the excavations of 1978-84in the center of the city (Calvet and Geyer 1987:138-140).The pit involved (Puisard 1096) was a sump pit, located in the street just outside the wall of the house. Connected to it was a drainfrominside the house thatpassed 24
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
tIz.l~.*
through the wall to the sump. Inside Room 1041 (Yon,Lombardand Renisio 1987:49-52),the drain was positioned near a stone basin, and fragments of a cylindrical pipe were found in relation to the drain and basin. It is clear from the context that the system was used to evacuatewater from the house. This type of system may be found either inside the house or outside. Numerous pits with associateddrainshave been found throughout Ugarit, some in the room covering the tomb chamber,most in other rooms. The House of Rasapabu offersone example(Calvet1981:39,fig. 1). In the house describedin detailin Callot 1983,a series of drains leading to a deep pit were found in what was probablya courtyard next to the room with the tomb chamber (Locus 10, Callot 1983: 31-35). At the sides of each of the doorways into the courtyard were vertical indentationswhich were almost certainly emplacementsfor verticalgutters from the roof, designed to direct rainwater into the drainsand thence into
?r
Courtyard, locus 10, fromCallot1983:33, photo 13. Inthe photo one can see the drains leadingto the pitfrom the emplacementsof the verticalguttersat the sides of the entryways (lowerleft and upperrightcornersof photo).
CJ et
Plan of the house of Ralapabu, with its numerousdrainsand pits. Note that none of them are locatedin relationshipwith the tomb in the centerof the house. FromCalvet 1981:39, fig. 1.
the pit (see the reconstructionof the room in Callot 1983:25,fig. 25).8The various drainage systems described in these recent reports are very similar to what Schaefferidentified as libation installationsat Minet el-Beida before he realized he was excavating inside houses and other buildings. The specific examples of "libation pits" at Ras Shamrathat were discussed in the reports also show the weakness of this interpretation.Two long conduits were found in the area near Tomb IV and identifiedas possible libationinstallations (Schaeffer1934:116).But examination of the plan and the photo of the tomb (117,fig.5 and 119,fig.6) shows that the curved conduit and the pit at which it ends were located in a differ-
N--
""A"
2,1* jy
--jI- . ......
4-,-
-
4-
474
~~""~i"MNMa"
'I"
W,
'*XANlV
Photo of Ras Shamra Tomb IV,showing the remainsof the wallsaroundthe pit associated with the curveddrain.Thephoto suggests that the drainrelatedto the pit (center) was laidat a higherlevelthan the otherdrain and apparentlypassedover it. FromSchaeffer
Plan of Ras Shamra Tomb IV.On the surfaceplanin the lower right,note the lineof the walls surroundingthe pit associatedwith the curveddrain.Also note that the latterdrainis not connectedto the otherdrain.Thefloor planof the tomb, on the left, shows the locationof a pit that was accessiblefrom insidethe tomb. Thesurfaceplanon the rightindicatesthat the pit was sealed off with stones and not accessiblefrom the roomabove. FromSchaeffer1934:119,fig. 6.
1934:117, fig. 5.
-00
7-7 -1s
Fxwy-
IA--
AOP**
.'C
lr-L
-
.C
ii A-
AA
-
3kd
~.
'b.
~r
-tt,
I 4 ~-h~ ~L~L P
f_, ct
?
""L''-TG~L~~'~~r: ~nr
'"
?? cC~ ~5b~'
.. ?e ,? i'.
4 r rL
~-
----~e
?r
Ill'
~
;rSbO' :~
??\fL~LL~L
.
i.
r u
sr
rC ? L
C
rl ~, i?LICj~L~L~
;Er~lL~~EY~
,,4
ir
?,? r
c ..
... ~
"`"?.-
~" r C?~
?)'
A ~a;L~ "
Ye
'I~il~
''
~LC~C~;'-rt ?.
~l[t_~
c ,r
r
--
.~C:.:
?t~
I, I,
;*
..
r~Luc?,?J ~s~.
?C
t~
:,? Cr
?.~*
'??
ru ?IE` r?
.o
-r
b~i ir
r
-"~rr ,s_
-"
?r~
r
r
t r : ::5`? i
r ~i '"ir ~e 4' '
~:c~_.1~4-?;? .' ~w`u~a`
.,C r
r.
,? 5; b;
r-
,, ~~-k -?
L~
?r i?)
,?S .t
3' r
ir, ?-
.
?
"
'
,
c
.. ,I
s 1
Ras Shamra Tomb II,with shortdrainbesidethe dromos.Note the drain'sdistancebelow the levelof the dromos,which itselfis well below the levelof the chamberroof.FromSchaeffer 1934:112,fig.3.
ent room from the tomb. Thus there is no reason to propose a ritual connection between them. The other conduit, which is only fragmentary,leads away from the tomb in both directions. The supposed libation installations in TombsII (Schaeffer1934:112,fig.3;115, fig.4)and L (Courtois1979:130,fig.11)are composed of short conduits that lead to a pit. In both cases the conduits face away from the tomb ratherthan toward it. At Tomb II, the conduit is beside the dromos,(a ramp that leads to the tomb) but it is several centimetersbelow the level of the coveringstones for the dromos, which in turn is approximately a meter lower than the top of the tomb chamber. Thissuggests thatthe conduitwas deeply buried under the floor of the house, and Schaeffergives no hint that there was evidence for a pipe leading down to the conduit. In any case, the conduit slopes
26
BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
away from the tomb ratherthan toward it, as one would expect if the libations were to go to the dead inside. It seems more likely that the conduit belongs to an earlierperiod in the site. The pit in the room with Tomb L is quite distant from the tomb and here, too, the drain leads the water away from the tomb, ratherthan toward it. Thereis nothing in its structureor location that suggests a cultic function. Tomb LVI,the other tomb which is described as having a related libation pit (Schaeffer1938:228,fig.29), dates to the 18th-16thcenturies(MBII).The floor level in the house was ca. 1 m. above the top of the dromos.A stone-linedpit and a stone table were found in the room over the tomb chamber,but it seems likely in view of the increasing recognition of phases within houses at Ugarit,9that the tomb was out of use when the final
Plan of the house containing Tomb L (50) and accompanyingpit. (Illustration top right.)Note also in rooms3 and 2 the remains of a drainagesystemleadingfromthe house to the largesewerpipeunderthe streetoutside. Thedrainsaresimilarin styleto that near RasShamraTombIV. Plan of Ras Shamra Tomb II.(Illustration bottom right.)CoupeABCshows the jar encased in the superstructure of the tomb and accessible the "window" inside. only through FromSchaeffer1934:115,fig.4.
floor was occupied. Even so, the pit has no conduit at all and shows no signs of cultic, as opposed to domestic, activity.
Windows A secondaspectof the cult of the dead, as Schaefferdescribedit, has to do with the so-called "windows" in the funerary
.
..
.
- --.-
-
.
-
-----T-A-_ -
, -,?
.
.
-
?-?
.
-
--
,
I-A1I
A . ..,
A.. ,AA, \A ,1111A"-A" ,, . . .,.,.,-.,,A,',, , -II..' 1..,.\\
,IA.
,
?
?
-
AA AA', A,A,', AAA A , ''''
'A A,A AA',,. *,'% &A \,
,
.
-
', A
J
A r..Ag-,?OA. , 'A 1
-
,
AAAA
?
I
-?
-- -!? -v73
7,Y
A-A.-
AA
A
,
l?-?2
--_
.A\. AA ' A ' ALA,?,,? A" ??A.lAA,1? I ?,A \,,'z, 'A
',' -0'
-? -,! AA-? ?, ,, f ?
A,?'
', T,
,- -,
,,, " .. - ??
A
7
r
--
?, ? -, -? - -? M A * a?4AA\ A A A ??Y?-,?,,A?'7V -----i,? AAA!??t AIN A!??
?
-
1 I
,A 1- k
, ,
,
,,r'l ???11,? 1,-
- V? ,'
-
R1
, ?-
--
!A A
--.'
\l
A A \-
-1-
Q `7-?
6A`,, ., .. .
, ,"
I
,
\, ,,,A",
L
-
, ,A??? - ..,
?? ....
,
. .
. 0A.
,,
,,
Y.#?.4-?,
I
,
A. ,,,,?-
I
I-, '
j,
"' ,
,--,"
',
?
-
IA .\A ..A'.'.'.j.', r--.... A.!AA.A,'A.AI AA,A.I,\AAA\, -AAA
?.?' A? ?? ,?,,? -A,,?iAA?AA?' AA"?
r ,AW\-\A+:A,A'A,
',??......6
A' .A 'A!
, ', , ,A''6'"; I. , -,,, , ,? A'.
''I,
.
,''
A
I AI
w , \'--0oW
AA
.
,, -,-
X 7II-r ??1?
,T
"
-,IAl"",?I-l
- -
-
11 A
AA.AAA," l-?jll
,
,?p"A
I-1
"
,,,,' '
,
l,
.....
,
-,
A,?,? - I I-1, ,, ,, ,I M AA 1 - -,
A " ?A
AA. l, ? , ,,,
, ,?" +, - 111 ,,', , AA
,
A
A A I,A A?
. A,-A . A I A'A' A'A'i.AAlA", '"?"X--,,A.II
'
-!
??..... ,?,?,,AA ,,,?, --. ? ,
- "
A
A " I
-
,, ,, ? - -? ?
, ?CAy"
,, A,A ' ,?
44
',- ,"I,
.-
, ' I -"1 'A,
'
- -1 0 14 -- - ---?,-\ATTkr', - - W, ? - I1 1 - - - X, - 1 ?",,,,, ,? ,6? ," ,
!.?\AAAA ? , ,, I
'
WA-k-A
A
A.
,A I, ,,,,4 ,`" ,,A4 A
1 ,\-'-&,
iAA,4-fA-AAAAA--j?A -
,-
$ ZZ?A7?A l w zA
RC
AA , - A.A A A'?'?, ,??,A\\\\&.A ,-i , - -,
- ???
g AA AA
A MM \
A\, 777A
,,--
?__
A
-
-
,-rA? A , -4. AAA.A 6 . A%- - , A' A --,',-AA 'A ?,'' ,',?I A0;A" , Apq , 11? ? , ?? ,g?,?,,,,? ?, " , "" ,, , "0A"', , ,,? ? ?, ? ?,??,,,? , , " ,, , , l ? - ,,? ? ,,? ???, ?, ??',?Il ?, , I...... ? , ?, , ,' , '' A A,. ? ,' A+ 0 2 ''A. ...I A ; A', ' - 1A" . . A 'A A AA ?' , A I - ,'; ?\YA?, A'rA" ,,, - ? \, ,AA, ,,, , -I - I 1, v" A'r, -.A,,,- .AA ,,, 1AA, , ,, ,. ',AA\, ,%,'%INA I 11 , ? , , ? ? '' ? ?,, ?, "'I" I ? ? ,_ ? , ", IY, ?i?, ,-,, , "',' 1, ,, ''????" ?WA " PAt',-- ??A?",A???1A' AAFzA.. 'A6A`? AI?iLA A A ?,??Z ?? , , ," , ,?,? ,,,,,,, " ,????,,'?'?? ",,,'?? , - ?? 1 - -?" ?1 I , 111I1, , , , ?, ?E , A,6I...,? , ??, ? "", I, "..? , ?.. 6, ,", l ',,''A Y,, - ,, 'I ?,?,,?l?,? - , ??,?,,z ",,, ',?A .A % ' ? ?r I I "I,, .'A? . '. . 0? ? ,??? ? ,,,??, -
'' ,,',,, \\,\,' ."'A" -
AA.!A ..AA AA\,A\ AAAA.A2 ?jA \?,
A %O A. 'M'Ir4-gjg AA?AAAA AA"A A-
A
,-
Y
.
,,? k
?
,AA
Y -
,,, ,,," , , A,?,A , , '44- ? "
AAA-1.AA.I I AA''I
7
-AA-A? !?D M3A -
\
,
-
]-
,
--
?A
- ',A4A, A( A AA\ ' - ??, Aiy .A -_A\:: AA\ A A-A--? -, -??,,?, -4, -, .ti--" AA-,A,, ,,,1,,-A A-, A--\ A,,, , ,,?AVA-K 4 ? ' I11''---1 --', _ ? I,? ,, ?, ?-'E 'A' A' AA----'A'-'A" ," -? Iy ? ? - ZqA --A\AA A\.. AA . ?A `ll lZ - !., ? ? 4 ?,?,A -? ?A ,? ?? -, ,G ,?
n , ,4
-
,,,?L
AnZ T A '7\ -' ------
A i . .
*' -
T
.,A
,
0111.....
2-
--
-
-
#AA-AA ?A---
,
A'-
"
-
,, r? - ?7
-
- -?
A
?, 7 _?_
A, , 1? ll`?,
':'
7,? ? ? ,
-
AA
-,?,? ? 1 ,, ,?- ,,
--
--
-
- --??-1 'I
-
,
?? ---j??-AA'
' 'AAy
.A?A _A
7
,-
\A\A
,, ,
' AA~~\ ,,.
? -
?, 1,\,--
,,, --..A-.jAk, A4
I A, .\A-.lll,?lAA-. 6'A -A6Z
A\ -\IAIl
,,,,AA" ,A , A A.A A 'A ",''A,:?
?
?
? 1,AA... A A"'A.' Y. -.A .A.., A-
- ?
-
\?~AA~ I\A17--
A A -- -
?,
- ,,
,
?l
--
,,??
A
--4-L-
??.----
,--A, -1 -
,,
, ,
.?
Aa
? A" -1?-? - ?? 'A 1' , ? ? -1? ,?A ?-, , '' A,1,AY , ? I I -A , I.,- -,, A??A 'I 'A,,*....'A", " ,? A A I,:,A . ,,AA6'A .`VA\A A A\A. 'I,A ".AA,. A A ?'' A'" - -ll -,, ? , , , 1 '' - , ,,,,I ,,? I - ? ?, 1 'l" ,??,?
?? I
.
*4,?O?.
-I
V.?
-
.
? --, , ?l - , 7r7 ? , -1 ? __-:? - ?? ,?, - . -,-----, ? ,l - '\ ?.A 'A-"?,-,??
AA A
-
.
V
WA AA
A
.
-i.A-?A-A-3! ,A\ A - - ------5 !?1?I . - , -737- ---- -,.-- -A. A AAA -A, AA., - AA A * 'AA ,A.4AA30:AA ..A?AA -AA
AA.A ?AA
'. A
.
? -- -- -
1
--?,?,II - -- 1-----\-f?
'A 1, A. A '
.
iA\ A
?- -- -- ?- - ? -:?
? ? A ?A
21..
1
.
--? - ?
-- - --
%.A A A--A ?A-K-AA-A.,.--'\\
AAA4 A -.......\A.
.
,,
\A- A\? ?l
'A-4P.MA\1A-??-??,"
.A
.
':
I", 'A" A -
j ?, 'AA
I , At'A N,
,6?
, ,
-.'.A.--'.AAo -,, 1A? ,,
?+ -,,
AA\A .A.?' AA',
?,?", AA A#1A? ?IA.I.......WA ??m ??,?-
' A A?lA ,
?,,I ?I?
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
!+I-
27
.... • ........ ,."
ii
.
.. .
TRWe
ojam
1.
The jar within the wall of Minet el-Beida Tomb III.Note how its mouthis coveredby the stonesof the tomb. FromSchaeffer1929:pl.LVII, 3.
??q?,,-,,?,,,,,,1,1-1?'y ?,?? ? I, ?,,???,? II?1'1? ?,
v?l?,,??', ?r ?O ?L I?I7,
m??;~ . ..: .* j~ .•
. ..
,. .
,
.
Jar outside the window of Minet el-Beida Tomb V. The report does not discusswhethertherewas any indicationof access betweenthis jarand the surfaceof the overlyingroom.FromSchaeffer1933:pl. IX,2.
111, '', ....... "
,?? !
.
,??? ,I,Y"?''?,,?? ''?,!I,,,,?,,?? ,,11 ,,41 ??? I", ?, ?..?? y??? ,'"'"'4"', ??,1"1'?" ,? ,I"'' "`?,? ?,," ??,,?,?,???,'', ,? ,', ,,?? ?''I","' I?, ??, ,,,? ,,,, I" ?,, ,!?, ?,??'',? I'' ,?'' ,?''? ,7, ?? ,,??? `..,h??k, ,,I','?? ,,'''"', ,?, "??'? ?, ,? ,, 1, ,I?" '! ''''I'', ,?,?? ?, III,,, ,,-IO I?,?? ?, I,''I ??, ?i?, ,1, I,? ,',",,I''Y' ?,,,,?,,,?,,,?, ??, ,,,?," ,II1?,l ,""?,, ,,?? ,????,??i? ,,,I,"I .1, ?, ,II", ,? ?? ","??,,,,4 ''Ill' ", 1, I,,,?, ,?I,??l I?,I"" ',1??, ..?,,,". ??I1, ''', ,??? ?, ?,?,?I?II,6,?? ,I?,I?, ?,,,? ??, ??? ,I,?,",,?, ,,, ,?? ,? ?'I'? ,,?I" ,? ,? ?? ',?, 1, "??,,,y-? ?, ???,? ,?? I?II,??,?,?? "'? ,'?.?..... ,... "'y''''', I'll ,''?,,,?,,? ,,,?, ?1? ,?, ?:1 ,,,,,, ,?, ,? ," ,,,, ??,,? ,6?`, 1, ,,'? ?p?, ?,? ",? ,,?1I',, 1? ,,?, ?,,', '', ,1, ?I,I,,", ,'?? ,? ?"I?,??'I, ?,,y ,I, ?,,,,, ,,..I,? ,,, ?" ?g, ?, ," ,??,I?,? ?,???,I,I ,I,,,, ,,, ,?,???? ?,,,,I'?' ?,,?,? ,??,2 ,--? 11 ,?,? ???" ?, ,,?,,,I,,,, ?,? ,I'' ,?,ll,? ,!? I,!!:, ?,,, ,?, ?, '', "',?, ?,,??, ",?? '', ?,I,? iI'" ??7 ,I?, ,?"?? "Y ?,,,, ?,,??,?? ?? ?I,? ,?I1, ,?,?? ,,??,?'',?,' ,I''?? ,'Y I,?, ?? ?,'' ??l' ,I !?l ,",'?,?,? ,,?,,,,,,; ,,?I?.,?', 11, ?,,,", ?? ?? ',I", ,,,,,,`,,,???? "'', ?,,,?,l ,II''I ,?,?? '', ",?,?,il ,,???, 1, ??, ?,??,,,?,,,,?,? ,,i","I'll'-l"", -,," ,I?,,,?? ,'''I', ,..... ,I1, ",I,,,, ''I 1? ????, ,?,,? ,,, ,,II,",,I,"", ,%,'', ,,?, '"', "''??,?,?,?, ll? ,,il I?, ,?,,,, ,11"', ,?11, ??,? I, ,,, ,,,II,?,? ???,?? ??I'll i? I,?,,, ,?, ?,,,?,? ,?, ,? ,?,? 11 ll,? iII??!'g .I"".... ;,?,!; "' ,? I ?,? ,? ?-? O I,? `?I,? ? ? ,,? ,?, I,???,,,I,I!? " . ? ?? -,,-,,,," ,,, "I ,,?,? ,,? , ? ,?? A ???, ?, ,,, ,11 " , ?? p , I?"?"I,-I,1, ?I?,,,, ,,1, ??? ??,?, ,??? "?"?',' ? " ', I?? ?,11, ,,,$ ,,,, , ?? , ,'? ? , ? , ? ?,,, ,o,,,,,,,, ,,?1, "??? ?,?,'' ? ,? , ?,?? ''",, " ?I????I?!;?? ,,I? I ? I ??II ,I? ? ?? I ?? ,',''? , ?, ,,,,??, " ,?,,?, '''???? ,?i-W ,,?I2Z? ,??,?, ,?, ?I?II,,, ,,, , " , ?, ,I,,,?, ? , ,? ? , I'?ll "" Ill, ,,? -,? ?? ? llll? 1? ? i?,?, " ? 1? ,? , ,"A ??, ,?,? ?,?" ?..I.,.... ;i,? " ,? 11, ? '', ?,?, ,?1, ,,? ?I??I?,,?', I?'', ?, '??,? "?? ,'' "'I'll, , ,? ?,?,?, ,w ,i?,1,i ,,?" "',?? ," ?? ?,??,,,,?' ?'?,?? ?? ,, ?I, "? ,?', ,? 1? ?? ??.???,? ';i,,,,"',,?, ?1? ,,I?, ,?', , I ,, ??,? ? '"??, , ? ? ?,,, I i , , ii, ,, " ? , ?', ,? ??, ? ,I , '' , , ?? ,??? _ ,?,? ?,??,? ?:?? ,?? ,?, ,? -? '' ? I ? ? , ?,,? ,,?j ? '', , I , ",,'? ?? ,' , ,1? , , , ',? ,' ?,?? ? ??, .. ? , I'' ,? ,?, ''4 ,II,I'I, ?, , ?? ? !?; , ? ??, , ,, ? H? , " ?'', ,, , I ?, ? ? , I ? , ? y ,',? ?? ? ? , I 7?, '?? , , T ?? 1, I , I I I " I ,W I 11 I ,,,Ii ?'?,?? ? I , ,? ? ??;,?? ?? ?!???? , " ? I I,????!!?? ,?,I ?I", I,,,,, I 1? I ? I ,? ?, ,,,??,, , , , " ''? ?? ?? ?, K ? I ", , ? " I I ? ?? , ?, " , I I , , ", ? ,, i ?, ,,, , ll,? ,?,? , ,,,, ,? , , i ,, ?!?, , II,? %? ?l ,, ,,, ,,, , , ? ? 0 , ?? , o i? '' ? ? ?n ? ?,!?, ''I ? ?? 1111111111 1? I 1,? ,I? ,,,??,,?,,,, ? ?? ll? , !!?? ?Ill, X ,,?,? , , , I ,?, 1?'l , ? ?', ? "', " ???;`? 'I",", ? , ",'' ,,, ? ,!? ''' ? , . I , , ? , ,?? , I ,? , ? ? .... ... ,, ?''I II , ? ,, , , , 11 I , , 1? ? ? ? ?i"?,?, , ? , ` ?? , ?, ? , ,? ? ?, I , , I ??!!?? , ? , ' , `? , ?? ,, ,, ? I? l?l ? ?', ?,, , W , , "' ,?, ,??' ,, ? ? , ?,! , , I ` I ,, ??'' " ,,,,, i , ? , I I` ? i , ?? I ', , , ? ?!?!? ,? , , ? 1, '4?` l , I "', ? ,? ?,? i? , , '" , ? 1?, , ??,? ?? ?,?-?:?? II,1,I,I,?, ? , ?? , "N , I '', ? ?????: ;, ,?? -?, ,,,, , , ? , , , ,, ?? I ?, ,,?,?I, ?l??-,,,',, ?, ?1, ,??" 0?,"'"?,,??? , ,,,,,?,,,??, ,,',,,?, ,Q -% ?', ?? 8 -ii" ,95 MA MI'I''I'' "1, ,"?? I?1, ,?,?, ??? , ,, , , , -,, '','','', " ? ?, 11 ? ?I ,1? ? ?,;,?'?,? i I??,1, , II?? ,?! ,?? ,? ,?,?? !;?!'?????? ?,,I, 1,? I 1, ,, , 11 ? ?, -? ? ? ,,,? ,1? ? ,, ll?l Yl ? ?, ,-,?,,-i ,,,? ?,,?,?? ,,? ?'" ', , , " , , , , I 4 ? ,,??,, , ,"' I ? ? ? ?,??', , I ?i 1 , ,,, , ? " ui-I ? 1 , ,, ii, (C ?? II?? ? , i?7?' `V I I " i ?, , I ?,?, ?,?, , I , ?, ,??,,, , ", ,?,, I ?,?,% ,,,, ? ; i ??? ?,,?,???,?,??,,,, , "i u " ,, I , ,,,? ', " I ??,?? ,,?I,?,, ? I??, ?I% ,,, , Ill,?, 11 " , I ? ? , , , ,?,,,, i: III, "' ?,??,? ?t 1, ?, ,,?,, ? 11, ?,l ,,,,?, ,?,P,, ",'I','' , , ,,, I ? Ill ? ,Z , 'l" , " ? 1011111 M ", I I ,?',? r Z 's ? ? , I 4i ? -,,?,,?,,??,,,,,,? ,? , , , A Q I . ol, ?? ??? ?:?? il I , ,?O U ? ,,?,,?,,,?,,,,?, I ? , ? ? ? , ", ? I ? , ,% ,, ?, ..... , ? , ? ? -? ? " ..... , 1, 1'1?1 , ?? ?,? ? ,??,,,,,,??,11??,,,,?, ?,?,,??l,,,I ,, ?,I` ,?? , ? . ?, ? ??,,,, , , --,?I, ? ?, , ,, '11111?1?11111'? ,6m* I , , v , ?1:1? ',,,?-5?,?-iF I I ? '--,?ii,?, ???,N Ill ? ? , ?? " ,,,??, , , ,,, ? I ?,,,', ? ? , Y ? , ,,,,, ? ??i ?,O ? ? ? ??,,?,,,, ? ? ?, , ',Y''-,? , R , -, "' ? 2, I 7 ?,?,?,,,,? ,,,,-',,? " ,? -1, ? ,?, ? ,?,, , , , ?? I ? '" ' ?? ??,,?,,?,,,?,,?,??, '?,?, -% -?, F? I ?, ?,? , ?, -,, -,"j " I I ?i ? ?, , , ,?? ,?I? 4, ?, ii,, ? , I -i ? I'?, ,,, ? , '"I'll, ,x ,,'?,`?,,-i?? , , ii?,, fg?--? -?-, ,"','", ,,:? i????? ,?,,?? " ' I j,;? ?',? ? ?, 1,? '','',?", 1?,,,1'1?"111111, M 1?-, ?,-???6,,,,?, ? :? , ,,,, ?'!?,?'4'1-?-`?;1,4, -I'l, ,??? ?,?"i" , , ,,, -, ?',-'T ?1?111 ??'', ?N "?,"I-I,?1` , ,- - ???!???!,??? T? ?? -`!? , ,V?-? ',,,"??, 1,?' "?` ? "'X ?T''?i,"? - -l", ?-??? i", - ,----,- ', -?-,--, I,,?l ?,? ,1'1,1?-ilq,-?",l ?,,,Ii,,?,16, ,,,, -7:??., 1? f?? ,"?` ?, ?-"4l'i?,-ll'-;IN 14 ,,I.,,,I.?? ,,,, -,?,, - ,-!,--"- i??? ---1----v?'-l P ,?6,1 11 'l,---J ??? '',?, ,,??I1, ,?l ?,?---,?,--i-?,? ?,?,? 111111?1 -?'i?,?,? ,,?' I-????? i",? I" '', i?--111, ""4? ,,,,, "-?? -7?Vl ," ,,?, ??,??,,,?,',?? ?, "I", , '4"-? VL?7 ?5',"?,????,,-?'?--?,,???,,i,-,,,?;?'Y",',-"-T-?,,*T,"??,"?,',,, "", , ,,?'T ,,?,, -I ,"I, i!?, ??y,?-,?,,,, ?,,?, ?" ?, ?""T"i "W", -?-t??, ,,,? ,li, ?? - -,-?? "'5i ,"',?,"P", ,,?, I, ? -,',, ,'!-',?',':'),P ?? ,I,,,,??,,,,,,, ?? ,-?-?"U ?,"?,"?,,?,? ,: ?V??? -,?,?,?e ", "? ?; ?,?ol',, ",,", "I'll-?,i'?44gii?, ,1, --, -1 ?"..... ??,??, -,,ii,--?? i?iT? ?", -?, ? ? , " ? I ? "" ?, ,? -?, i 1?-?& -? " ly ? ""'i, -, ,?,?', ??, ?, " I I ?l ??? ? ? ? , , , ?, , ," i,,ftd,-? ,,?, + "'"?', ? "I ? -7i ??-, V :', , I _', 11'', ? . , ,,--'?',i?,7?-_,-,,-_?,-,"??,--?,?,?,:? %?I i? ??1'"? ? 1 -,?-,,i??-?M ?? "? ??, ,I?li'?T -?? , :??? i,?....... ,,,, -1,?- ,-,?:?? , , ?, "'?? ,I?,i ''I",? ?-?,i ---?,?,n? ''I?,""', "T FE - ?,?, I-?,i,'?', -,,-] ?,, i'y "I'll'' ?i?? ?- ----,,,?,,1?6? 11 ?? 1, IZTR'! -----,,? ,,, ,1?`?? ?A-i? 1?? !, I ---,,?,, ?,?-,?',???V,, -?,?? -,'y ,?-"??&,,?, ?-?---?, ,? --?- --- -.. ,,, ??-, ,-Y?,??, ?-,,I-,? ??`??' - ?? -T-?-?-?-?- I '?,?Il ,?7, ---, "'i'"'", --7T,t,? . -?k?w - ,..- .r I,"?'l -??, --,,,"?,-?,i, i I?? - -1? ---?-----I?? '4' ?''I ?"??,?? -??, ? ,?,,--,?,I Ii??],? i,??i!c???,? ,-,,,,,',-? , ---??, ---??'-:?,?f? -`,,,!? ?,???,-??, ,,?? zz?,?? i-11 1-?,-"-??;? ':??, i"?,-I",,, -t,?? 1I'' 1,1i? W?* ,?? ---?,-- ?-, - ?I - 1, 1, II I I ,-l,?,,'i`-` --"I-,? "''i ?,-1 "?1'1'1? i_ ,-. - -i,','';,r -- ?-:-- ----ii" .?? ?-?,,?,? "?,-;?U ,,?,?, ,-?,,v-1?-----?,? I,,? ?_'?" Ii ?,?,` -?y -?c? ---'' -V -?ig I-,," ?''??,?,A - ",''I''i"I'L -?--.,,-,,, I-,?ii, I -ii-?,?i?? I,,-;?? --I---?-?,?7----111,1? ,?"t, -1 ,,? --I, Z -,Ti , ,? ?-?? ?,Ii',?, ,,''I' ?---.1; ,,?-,LILL--_, ,,,--i,", " ?` ,''?,?-?,L, li''?x -ll? ii-?? ?,...... I-, ... ,? I"y"i'', ,?,,,, ?, ,, ?-, , ,i,,,,i " ,,?, -?? ,?i ?,,,?''7, ii ? I'll"', i-', Z?? -? -1 --z71 T, ,',,'?, ?4 -? ? ?, ",Y? , , , , ? I ? ? , """ ", ,-,?? ? C IT,? ----? ? I --?? , "?? ? I% ?"" 5,,?, , 11 ? ? ,,,? " , ,, " , 'I' ? --" 1F ?? , ,??, ",?,`,V,?tt?y ? ,,??,,,?,,'? ?1'?"" ,Illi, !, - -----?- --?I'll i,, ,-,'-- 'I,-I'll, il? ,,iii, ,I,Z, ,,,,, I-??Z,',? '--, ,-!?? - ?i,- --,7?---i??--7-1-_----- -1, ,,,,-,,, - ?-,11 --I-,??, ---?,,, Y?? ,,i11 ,-, ,--'4 -11 --:??,? --, -V, - I ,I-?-",?, ,,,''I'l?Ill,'',?'?,,',',,,,,?,?,,, "I " ,,,-,I??,-I,-,iT??''ill 'I, ,1, ,?'l ?I?11 ?? ?,I,, - , ?? 77,? ----, ,?,?,? ?il?? ,I'-, IL,i, 1'? ",,,,, ---u-7II -I"',,''?,? ?,-? - - I ??--? ?7' F- ---- ,??;? "'' , , --,---? ?-?-I -11 ,--, ??Il ji,"-? ?l -I-I"", f?? .I,,?, ?,l ,"i,,,,, ,"?, , I,,"I'll ?,-I--?i I,.'', ?I.?iI '"I'' ,,", -i,-" --Tj?i-, -,-?,,?%5?-I-,kr -,,I?? ,I-,,,,,--,??,?, ,1, 1? -i---?? --?"I'll, ?v,' ?? ?? -, :? , , -? " -? ? -_T I I , ,,, " 11P , ? , ??? ??????? . I I ? "Ill ? I I , I ..... , "',"I,",', 7 ,",", ? : ?? ......... " , ? I, j I 1 1, , ,, ,,, ,, ,,,,,,, , ? ? ,??,, I , , ,,, ? ?16 1 ,,?,j ? ? ?,V , i?, I ?, ? ?'?' -? 1, ?,?l ??,."?, "",?,,,?,,? , , ?? I??,'--?T ? , ,,, ? ?11 i , I, ? ? ,, "'' , ,,? ,?,, ?,? -i-ii-i I ,,,i,,'I?,,,,,?, ,",,?,??'?, ?,,'', ?,11, ?,,?? ?:,,, 1,I-1, ,7"??il, I,i,?', --,--,?7'?, -,I,?,,,I,'"'? ?-?, ?I', 1, i,??, ?? ??, ,,,?,?,?,,,:? "?? -1,?"i", ?I-,,??? ,--,,,?" i?? 1,,?,? ,?,,,?,I?i1? I-11 ,,? ?"I-,-,?--",-"?, -?-,?,-""-,,,,, -?-?? I,I,-i,,i--,,, ,,,,?,,"",,?-"??, I?,i ",-,,"--,?-,?I-?-i" , ? ? ic I ?? ? '' ? :? 1, , , 7?F ,, j , " ? ,,, I "'I'l , ?, , , " ? 4 ; , , , ? ? I , , ? ?! C , , ,,, ,' ,, , ? ,,, I -y' , , 1, ? , 'j, ? ?' :1 -,"II?, ""', 'I? -----?? I ?, ?-?7?? ?" ?",,',,,,?, ??-!?--? ,??, ?` i?,,j,i?, ,?? , ,?, ""'',,,?, ,I,?I, , I'' i?,?' I,1,-,,-",,i,, '??I??', ?,T,, ,?c-lli .?? 1-1 ? -1 , ,,',,''?-,,, ?? "' ?,?, ijII 'j, ?,,,,,-'",'? ?,?il"-?1? ,-,,`? ,,"'?,'-, ?? ,,,,?' " -, ?,,?,"? ?..... -I-?,??,o ?,,,,?,,,?"" ?..... -1, ?c,?,,,,,, ,,'', ,,, '' ,,,, ,,,,?1," ,-j1? _-, ", - I???, '', ,,,,,? ?, ?I ,''II"111, ,,, I1? ,,', ,,,, ?7, ?I'll -i'lj, ,1,'', , ,,,1, I,'"', I,,u, ---" .???, .I,.,,? ?!?? I,,?,,-,I?,? I?I?''? ,il 11" I,,,,,?', I,II?y??l ,II,?,,,,,? ,,??, i - ? ---, '?-??!,!;??? ?'?, ,,, 11 ,,,,,,?'? ,,, -II??1, iI-i,IIT ,,?',,,' ?????????,, " P ,?17?11?,,'?, I" j,? ,,?,,, ,,I?,??il, ,?-?,11 ?? ,'? ?,,` ?! iI,II,V?o "', ,,,!,,', I" ?? ??? ,?,?, '?, ??!? ?",? ?? "...... I?? I-1I-?:? ,? ", ?,!? ?? ?? 1?, ,,,?,?,??, ,i,,11 ?,? "-I", --?, ",,,, ',I?, I??, 11 ,,?? ,??", ,,?, ?, ?', I,I?,,,, ?.? -?', ,,I?j,? ??-1`1 ',?,',` ?Y?? ??, I,,,, i?? ??,?',?, ",`,? 'I" ?" 11 ,,,?,`-,?,?,,"" ,''?i,,?? II I-????? -'', ,I,,,? ?,-, '''',??,?, ,i?l? ?",,'' ??? '?' 4.1, .... ..,? ,,?,,, I I I I il-,?, li? ,1,1? ,,'' , '', ?'?,? 'I, T I ,,? "' ? , '? ? , '' ? , ,, ., ,? , W I ,t ,,,, , ? ? , , " ll?'l ,,'??,??,?,A 1? I ; ?,,?, g ,, ''? ? ?, '', ? , ', I ''I 2 1,? ,? ? " 1? "I ,-,,..... I . 1?? , , , ?', ,-,`"?I?? ??, ,?,,,?, ,,,- ?l ? ?? ? ?,? ,. ?,,-j,c?.???,, i I ??, I ? , I I'' ?,,?,?,,,p ?? ? ? ,? ?, , , , ? ? . ? I ? , 9 , I ? ? 9 i? 7 ? "? ???, ? , ? , , ?\.: I" , i? , , ?? I'' 1? , ? I I , I '' I , , , ? ,? ,'? ?, , " ? ,? " ?? ? I, , ? I ,, lv ??, ,? J ,?,,? , ?,? ,,, ? I I , , yi?','?," ?? W I", ?, ? ? ?, ", ,,,,, ?? ,, ? ? I,,- I??? ? ?,,,, ,? "I' 1? , . ? S ?11?111 ? 1?,l '',????,,??,,"???,,?,?,i??,.-.?.., ? ? ? , ', ?, I , ,, ,, ,,, , l I , ?, ?, , , I ?'", ,V ll,? M 7 I "? ?,? A ?, l . . . ', ? , ? , ,?,, ?,, ,6 ? ?,,? , ? ? ,, " .... ..... , ? ?? %, ,?,,,,?,,,,,?,,? ? , , I , ,?'?` '' I, ? i?i !???1? o 11'ul?l l? ? i ?? ?, j .I.V 11 ??, 'I, , , , ,, " ` , ? ? ? , , P ? c,' " ? ? ", ? Il ?,lQ ,,,, , ? ? 1, ? '. .1 'k ,?,, 1? 11 ? A ?? ll? , ,, `, , " , ,,,,?,, ... M ?,Il? 1'', '" , , , ,',,,?,-'N ?? ? ,,?,? ,? ??,, ?? I,1,I,? 6'? ,?? ??? I?', ,?? ??', ,,?l ,.?,..'',,,?? I?I ,I,,,, ,I,?, ", -?,? "I'll, ,?,? ,,,??', ?, '',,,,' ?,,,,?,,,,?,?,,??,?'?,?,?,?, ???? 0I,-"', ,? I?, ,1?, ''I ,j ,-1 , ??,? ,A ,?",?? ",?,????,,??',';-??????,?', ???,?, ?? ?, ,1,? i?,? ,1I1......11''.` ,?? ?,1,?? ,-?,I??, ,,? ??? 11,1?,??? I,,,,I?? t,,?, ??I??? ,,,I?, I'?? ??U ,,,??,?? l"I?,,?11 I?,,? 11 ,??'?, ?I,,I?? ?.-,,,? ,,, ,? ,?, ??,?? ,,,? I'll, ,??I??, "`,? 11 .,, ,.?I. ??1,i?I??, ,?? ?? v,????? ?? ?,"I ",," ,?', I?ll? "?'..., ?, ??,,??, ?,? ,,,??? ,.?,?. -'-,?, i,?,,?,?? ",I',,'' ,,,??,,? ? ? ?, ? ? ???l1? ?? .... ? ????? I ,',' " ? . ,, ?? ,, ?? Ill """, . ", 1? ??? ??? ? , 4 , , , ............ ?,? "I ,,,,, ? ,,,,,,, " I P , ? ? ',, ? i ? '? I ??, ? ? . ......... ??, 11 I ???????? ? 11 1, I . ? ?? ? i ??, ,k? ? ?? ' ?.% ?? 'I"," ?,,?,? ? ? I , I ?? ,?,`?`,,, ly?,, . ,? ,?,' ,,,? ? ,,, , ?? ? % ? ? .ll,, , ? " ? ?? M ? ,,,,,,,,,? , ? ''???? ?? ? ,?,,,? ? ? '''', ? 1 I fl ,? ?, ? ?? ??,?? ?? U ?? I ,,? ?? ."\.-l ????",?, ??,? ',,?? ,?,???,',,?',"',,? fl i 112 ? , ll ? , , ','' ,,, ,,? ,L l I v ? , ? ,,, ? 1? I ' , ? ? " ? 'L ? ? ,?, ,,,,,, ii, ?? ' ?"' ',',?? ,,,?", ?,? ? ?w ? ? ?? ? ?', ?,?? . ,, '', , 1? ??,,? ,`?,,6 ??,? '', ?, ? ,?? w , ,,?, I I ?,? ? q ? , I ,, , , ' , , , , ? ,,, ,, ?,,? " ? ? , ? ' ,I,i,cI??? 'V ,,,,,? ,?,? "'''', ll?? ... ?,l1,???,?? AO ? 1??,? u,?I,, 1,? ?',,'-,???,???? ,''' ??,"y ,? ... ?? ?, ,... ,I'?',?,??, ,,, ,,, 1?111 ,,?? ?,? ,,? , ,?,q ,,," , -??1.10 ?, ?L ,I? ???!?? -,,,I?, ,I?l I1, ?,U',? I??Y, ?? I.'', ????!?, -,,,??" ?,???? ??? ?. ?? "?,? ,,,, i'll1,? I??, ,,? , ,% ,I,, ??,??, ?,?,? ?, ?',?,,?, ?iI?,'' ,?1, ?, ,,?? Y 2I,?,??_ il`?, "?,??,? ??,???,?, ,?,? ?l? I,,,, 1 I11i? Y?%A% ,? oiy'',?? ?, ?,11,1 " ?, ?",???? ?, ,? ',,,? 4V ,,,, ?, ,,,,? ??,,? ??? ,?H ?,? ?,?` ,,?,I,?I? ",''I I ?? ,''? ,,,,?,"lll? ? i?17 ,?I""" ?11? ..?.,.? ,1?? 11 ll? P ,?l"''? ""Y", ,"W ?,,, ... ?? ?I?,,,,,,?,,??, ?,,,?, ,,, "I", ""? ,,?..IS I''?, i I ?? ll'llll` ?, ,,, ?, ,?,,,? ,,? ,,,', " ,?", ?,? .I........,, ,,,? ,??,, I,? ,?,?? ?? ,,,,% ,',? ,?IV ?I"1 "'I", yo ?, l,? ?,?, IIl?l?'??? ?I,,?," -? -,I " '' ''I " in ?,?, ?,lj !? Ill ,,??,,??,?',?,, ?, I', II ll? % ?,,??! I ", 'N.-M ,,? ??? ?,,g,,,,'111111 ,? ,', ???i ,,V ? ?-? ?,? ,??I' ??? I'',,, ?,?,?, ?I ,,,?, ?, -,,?? ??? ?? ?1, 0? ,S? ,%R .....?. ',?y I-I.? ?, ? ,,,, ? I ?' . .I? ,, ?`9 ',,,? N 111? ll ?? i , ?l ''I ?, ?, ,, 1, I ?: ???1? ?, ? ? ??,,?,? ? 1?111 kYll. ?,? " ,??, '', ,,, 1? , .? .? I ,,,? I W ? ?? ????,?? ?,,,? ? ??p , ? ?, ?, " '?,,,i, " !? ? ,?,?V . ` I I ?i ? ? . .. ,?? ,,, ?, , I i, `? ? ,,,,,,,?, ,? ,, " 1 1, , ???,? ?? .. .. ,,,,,,,,,,, ? '', , ,, ll?" ?Il ,,, ....... , ?, , ? . I'll ,?,,?,,,,* I ? ', 11 ,???` ?? , ?? ? , , ?, ? '' 11111?11?1111'? , i .. ... , "??1 , , ?? "Y''.... ?, I ..... , -? , 'y''', i? 'I i ? ?? , .%M 7 ? ?? "ll .,,' ,-o?,o ?????r ?,?i?i, ????!,?! ??''I ,,?2 ?,? -?,??? ??, '..El.. I?,,,?, ',??, "I?, ,?-???I?,?11? ....... ,.,?. ??. ,? 1,% ,,? ... ... Z ??? ?,? .???? ???? .???, ..??? , ,??, ?,? ',?, A ?y,?I ?,??, ,,, .,.?? ?? ????? ???? ,,,, ?, ,,,?,k? ,,?', ?? ?? ?? ,??I?, ,11 ?,?? ,?! ?1?1 ?, ?"'' ,,? ??? ,? ,?,? ?,,,,?,", ??? ??,? 111M I?%). ,?,.:.,.1 ,?',, ??c ,,O ???, ?, ,,,?,?,?? ?,??? ?i ??," ,...,? ,R ?,,,,I??'" ???? ??? ,?,'l?,I,?,?, ???
''I ?,I"'' ,? I'?' I?, ?' 1, ?, ?"' "I ,?-!,,','%,''j ,? '?',?,, '111 ,? ,A`,?` "?1, ,l?'?', ?,?,? ?', I?I'', ??,"! ??, ??? ?,?? ,,-, ?,?0,,?', ??? ???,?, -,",,,
,?, II'll 11?, ????? ?,?? ?i, ,,? .k, ?, ?, 6.,I ?,,? ??",??, ?,? ??? ,?x.,?,? . ??? ,1?, I???,?', ,1? ,I,,I,,,,III?l, 11 '?' ??,???,1? "'I,' "A ,,,,,,,,P ...."@,.YW ?I?I???, ,,,??? ??, ,',\,??-? ?`,,? ??i ??', ?X ,?? ,?1? ?? ?,,l ?,?? 1...,..v..1. % Y, I
28
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
- ?1, ry' ??? ??I I,II?-`? k4Ve_ ''?,,,"''tt
?,??,,?? ?,,?? ?"''? ? I??,?,?, I,?,?, I?????? ,, ,?,,,, ???,? ',??,? ?11 1?,?,(, , ?`
C lit-*-a
I ~4lit
,or.
*Y*
orr
o'f
*F,A
ism" A7
"Rik, J
,
,
4 O
,,
4
a,01
Photo of Ras Shamra Tomb VIII,showing the brokencapstoneswhereplunderers entered the tomb. FromSchaeffer1937:136,fig.4.
Plan of Tomb XXXI.(Illustration bottom left.) Theplanindicatesthat almostthe entiretop row of stones was removedfromthe tomb. FromSchaeffer1939b:93,fig.87.
chambers.Most of the "windows" are identical to the other,more common nichesfound in the chamberwalls, except for the fact that they do not have a stone sealing the back of the niche. An example can be seen in the plan of Tomb L (Schaeffer1938:314,fig. 42), which shows the tomb chamber possessing four niches with thin stones blocking their backs, and one "window,"a niche without the blocking stone (photos showing niches in tombs include Schaeffer 1934:pl.XII,3; 1933:pl.XV, 2). Schaeffer related the "windows" to the libation
pits, stating that their exterioropenings were positioned directly beside the pits (1939a:50).Unfortunately,Schaefferdid not provide a single example in his reports of a window opening onto a pit that was accessible from the floor of the room above. The only tomb discussed by Schaefferthat had a window opening onto a pit is Ras Shamra Tomb IV, where the pit is actually a feature of the tomb structureitself and is only accessible from the niche/"window" inside the tomb and completely sealed off from the surface(Schaeffer1934:116). There are three other tombs (Tombs mIland V at Minet el-Beida and Tomb II at Ras Shamra),however, which Schaeffer describes as having funerary cult installationsrelatedto windows. In each of these cases, a jarwas found placed at the exteriorside of the window. But the idea that these jars were used for postfuneralofferingsto the dead is problem-
atic. In fact, the jars in question at two of the three tombs (Ras Shamra II and Minet el-BeidaIII)were entirelyinaccessible from outside the tomb. Like the pit in Ras Shamra IV (above), the jar in Ras Shamra II was completely enclosed by the superstructureof the tomb and only accessible from the niche/"window" inside (Schaeffer1934:115,fig. 4). It thus would have functioned only during rituals taking place inside the tomb, which most likely were performed only on the occasions of funerals.10The jarin Minet el-Beida IIIwas also completely covered by the stones of the tomb, and it is not actually dear from the text and photos whether it was even placed at a window (Schaeffer1929:293;pl. LVII,3 and LVIII,fig. 1). It is most likely a foundation deposit, put in its position during the constructionof the tomb and never again accessible.The only jarthat might have been accessiblefrom the surfaceto
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
29
c
-
.
?--
rr 4
-
44.0
0.. -
KIP-
*,.-*
-e
r
..?
*
4-
f
T4'
be used for libationsis thatfound outside the window of Minet el-Beida V. However, Schaeffersays nothing about indicationsof a pit or pipe relatedto the jar (1933:100), and all the soil around the jarhad been removed when the published photo (1933:pl.IX, fig. 1) was taken. Thus there is no evidence that this jarfunctioned within a libation cult that took place in the room above, and it, too, may have functioned only from within the tomb chamber.
Ceiling Holes Holes found in the ceilings of some of the tomb chamberswere the third major type of exteriorlibation installation described by Schaeffer.After discussing the evidence for libationpracticesinside the tombs,Schaefferdescribesthese holes only briefly: "Inthese latter examples one would have had to penetrateinside the vault to perform the libation rites. To avoid this certainother tombs, e.g. the fine vault No. L discovered in 1937, had openings made while the tomb
30
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
was being built, or pierced afterwards through the slabs of the corbelledvault" (1939a:51).This proposed method of introducing libations into a tomb has been discussed in some detail by J.Ribar in his influential 1973 dissertation, "Death Cult Practicesin Ancient Palestine,"in which he comparesthe Ugaritic evidence to a few tombs in Palestine which also appear to have openings in their ceilings. However, the evidence for such libation holes at Ugarit is very weak. Examinationof the plans and photos of the tombs discoveredat Ugarit and Minet el-Beida shows that a number of them indeed had holes in their ceilings when discovered.11However, the photos show that the holes are not crafted into the structures,but rather are placedwhere one or two of the stones that seal the apex of the corbelledvault along the length of the chamber have been removed. There is no pattern as to where the hole is located in relation to the chamber.Some appear near the side of the chamberwhere the entrance
Photo of Ras Shamra Tomb VI,showingthe hole in the ceiling,again made by the removal of a capstone.Inthis instancethe dromos had been opened as well. Presumablythe plunderers found the roof of the tomb first,removed the capstone,locatedthe dromosand entered fromthere.FromSchaeffer1935:pl.XX)00, 3.
Ras Shamra Tomb I. (Illustration top right.) The planin the upperleft shows the hole in the ceilingoverthe farend of the chamber. Note that the plunderersalso pushed backone of the second-levelroofstonesto enlargethe hole. FromSchaeffer1939b:87,fig.80. Plan of the unnumbered tomb found along the citywall,fromSchaeffer1951:5,fig. 1. bottom right.)The hole in the ceil(Illustration ing is on the far left of the plan.Note that two and possiblythree stones had to be removed to makethe hole.
is located, others at the far end. All of the tombs that are missing one or more capstones had been plundered in antiquity. In all cases the evidence seems
I~~ sz~~;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
*
I
.
-
-
\ R-~
-~~~~~~~~~~ c~,l~~~ i~; w-----ka
-~
'
--
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ -
hW-i
:-
z
4~~~~
~Bi..-~ia
~
-,
-~-~-
<~1 ----------------------------------
:~~
s,
?,
~
-~--
~----
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
31
I
I
1
E , - E- "F E h I"-nv ?, ?''" ,, ", _ T7 , ? ? -T ?N? l,,?,?, ,, , ,- ,I,?, ,-,,, - ? -__?E I, -,I" ? , l -? I -? I1??? I", T T , ? , ?II, IT?? ??,?, I??,, I --: 1? ,z ,?U E,_,l ? t - -_-EE?_T -, ,?,??, , --, I--_ -7 L ,? ? ? , I ?' ??? _'I,,?O ? ? 'llI EU ? K?? t ??i? - , ,E--, , , ,',?,, l do, -"E l~_ EE - -i ,t ?? _?,11? ,- _ _T t'fAv-t, ? ? - , ,? , 1 11????t
- _t ,E?T -_ I ,l -,C
-
- , , ,, ,,,- T--- Nt, -1"t,x wxj, ,xxt
-
xx-E'
?
-_
__
x
,- --
xx
5,
TE
1
,
Y
?t, N?x1,xx k',
?
-,x-xx--, ttNa, -xt'x-_t xx--
_,",
Itt,
-x xxxxxxxxx~xx-x x- -x x-x-x'xx--x-'---ilA
N? _-
-
xTTtT - - "
?,- -__
'4y -',t 'x4#154 -Ttt
,
Nx
-
xx xxx 4't:xx __xxxxtt't"
TE??
T
--?
93??_? -
- ,
E 1
' ,FT
-
_
,x_ U_ !T _-N? ?xxttj
"xx-'''xI, x-_ x xx5' __'xx' -'f
-M-xxxIx,
?
,TE- T, "
-
EE--L' -,??
- ? - -T-
-
-
l
" - ? I-
?" ?-
1
T i , ,,,,
?I.. I ? ,I' x ,
_ lE
-
~
~
___ U-____ x_xx
-
,
_KtN
U
xxx'
_l__
,
Nt \xxxxN xxx , "I , ' ,,4,4txx-xhxttNN?xx txxt~x x Nxxx'f x T_ rE_' ,,,,
x? -x x
'Z
t'xx>x"
N-tt$
111,1?
-5-7-R- ----
-xx'xxxxx' i g--xt
tx
'xx
'xx N
x
7E--
Plan of Tomb L fromSchaeffer1938:314,fig.42. The planon the left and coupe AB both show the "window"in the northeastside of the chamber. The planon the rightshows the hole formed by the fact that one of the four capstonesis missing.CoupeCDshows that the hole createdby the missing capstone is not overthe funerarypit at all.
most reasonably interpretedby suggesting that the stones were pulled up by those who dug down into the soil searching for tombs to rob. In several cases there is no question thatthe holes were the resultof plunderers. These include: Ras Shamra Tomb VIII,where broken pieces of the capstones were still in situ (Schaeffer1937: 136, fig. 4; and 138, fig. 5); Tomb XXXI, where most of the capstones were removed (Schaeffer1939b:93,fig. 87); Tomb1065,where during excavation,the pillagers' pit down to the tomb could actually be followed by the excavators through the overlying soil (Salles 1987: 163);and the Royal Tombs, in which most of the top of the eastern chamber was pulled away (Schaeffer1951:17, fig. 8). Assuming that the photograph in Schaeffer1935:pl.XXXII,3 shows it as it was found, the conditionof RasShamra Tomb VI suggests that the plunderers of the tomb dug down to the top of 32
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
the chamber,pulled up a capstone, found they were near the entranceto the tomb, and then moved over, dug up the dromos,pulled up the cover stones and enteredthe tomb. A similarsituation appears to be the case with the tomb found in the Grand Batiment (Margueron 1983:6-7;23, fig. 1;25, fig. 3), where again, a capstone near the dromoswas removed, allowing the plunderers to see how dose to the entryway they were. The stones covering the dromoswere then dug up and pulled out of the way. TombL has been the most commonused ly example of a Ugaritictomb with a libation hole in the roof (Ribar1973: 47-49;Lewis 1989:98).Ribar(1973:48) described the hole as follows: "TombL exemplifies this type of structure.The hole in the apex of the vault was covered by a well-worked stone, the nub of which was seated in the aperture.There was a pit in
the floor of the burialchamberdirectly below the hole in the capstone." This interpretationapparently is based on a misreading of the tomb plan (Schaeffer1938:314,fig. 42-there is virtually no discussion of this tomb in the report).First,Ribarseems to identify the stone shown in Coupe [Section]AB as the cover stone for the hole, the "wellworked stone." In fact, the stone that covered the hole was missing, and the stone in Coupe AB is one of the other capstonesin section.Ribaralso apparently failed to notice that Coupe CD dearly shows that the hole in the ceiling is not directly over the funerary pit at all, but to the side. Thus, there is no evidence that the hole was an intentional part of the constructionof the tomb. In fact, it, like the others,is almost certainly the work of plunderers.Examinationof the plan shows clearly that the hole is caused merely by a missing capstone. In
this case, the pillagers dug down onto effer and later excavators have noted the far end of the tomb and removed the floor levels in the rooms over the tomb chambers,13the floors are reguthe capstone to gain access. In this way Tomb L stands in a class with both Ras larly 30 to 60 cm. above the top of the ShamraTomb I (Schaeffer1933:115; tomb capstones.14There is good reason to put a fairly thick layer of soil above a 1939b:87fig. 80) and the unnumbered tomb found along the city wall (Schaeffer tomb chamber,since it makes good insulation from the odors that would 1951:5,fig. 1). In the lattercases, also, the hole is at the far end of the tomb chamotherwise emanate from the tomb after ber.But in both of these tombs, the hand a burial. No published cases offer any of the plunderersis quite dear, since the indication of some type of pipe leading that show the robbers to redown from the floor level and fitting had plans move not only a top stone, but also one into one of these holes. Thereis simply of the second-tierroof slabs to gain access no evidence that there was a connection between the floor of any room and the to the chamber.12Thereis no indication of a designed libationhole in any of the roof of any tomb chamber. published examples. Storejars There are, in fact, other reasons to doubt that holes in the ceilingwere used Anothertype of proposed libationdevice for pouring libationsand food offerings described by Schaefferin the reports, but not discussedin Schaeffer1939a,was into the tomb. In the places where Scha-
the presence of large storejarsburied beside the dromosof the tomb. Only two examples of this have been published, Ras Shamra Tombs IV and LIV.But in neither case is the cultic nature of the jars obvious. The three jars near the entrance of Tomb LIV (Schaeffer1938: pl. XXI,1) are enormous and seem much too big to act as libationreceptaclesfor the tomb. If they belong to the same phase as the tomb, it seems much more likely that they were used for ordinary storage and were placed in this location, as a convenience, during the construction of the tomb, since a large hole had already been dug here for the latter purpose. The function of the jarbeside Tomb IV (Schaeffer1934:121,7; pl. XII,1) is more ambiguous and could be cultic. However, one should notice that its mouth was situatedwell below the level
Theirlargesize is indicatedby the personshown in the upperrightcomer.Itseems The three large storejars buriednearthe entranceto TombLIV. unlikelythat threesuch substantialjarswould have been used to receiveregularlibationsfor the dead. Theyare more likelydomesticstorejars,set in placewhen the tomb was being built.FromSchaeffer1938:pl. XXI,1.
of the dromos,and thus well below the floor.This suggests that it may have been a foundation deposit. In addition, one should note that if it did function as a jar for funerary libations, it is the only exampleso farpublishedfromUgaritand thus is not representativeof ordinary practice.
LibationTables A final type of installationmentioned in the excavation reports is the "libation table"or "tableof offerings,"a large flat stone usually with a groove around its sides which leads to a spout. These tables were sometimes found in the room over the burial chamber,but often in other rooms. Schaefferinterpreted these stones as another style of libation installation,used sometimes in the funerary cult and sometimes in a more general fertility ritual (1929:287; pl. LI,4; 1933:107;pl. XIII,3; 1935:147; pl. XXIX,3). Recently,however, these stones have been studied by O. Callot (1987),in relation to one found in a house during excavations in 1980-81. He has convincingly shown that they are actually elements of oil presses, in fact, the tables upon which the olives were pressed, and have no relation to funerary cult at all (see esp. 206-209). Summary All of the remains identified by Schaeffer as funerary installationsdesigned to allow the living to provide water and/ or food for the dead from outside the tomb are better and more reasonably interpretedas mundane items, unrelated to the cult of the dead. There simply is no published archaeologicalevidence that a regular ritual of feeding the dead was performedaround any of the tombs at Ugarit.The "libationpits"and "drains" prove to be ordinary sumps, latrines, guttersfrom the roof,and other ordinary installationsfor the use and disposal of water in the houses, misinterpretedby Schaefferbefore he realized that the tomnbswere located under the floors of dwellings. The "windows"in the tombs, for the most part apparently just niches whose back sealing stone is missing, show no connectionsbetween the house above and the tomb below. Although 34
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Entrance to Ras Shamra Tomb IV.Tothe left is a jarwhose mouth is considerablybelow the levelof the top of the stones that coveredthe dromos.Inthis positionit is not likelyto have been used in libationceremonies.FromSchaeffer1934:121,fig. 7
two or three tombs have "windows" that clearly have a ritual function, none of them appear to have been accessible from the floor above the tomb, but were only useable from inside. The attested holes in the ceilings of some of the tombs are best understood as the loci of entry made by tomb plunderers.None of the holes gives any indication of having been designed for the tomb, nor is there evidence that there was access from the floor of the room down to the level of the chamber roof, where the holes were found. Storejarsset near a tomb provide no clear evidence for regular funerary offerings. The published examples are either much too large and numerous to have functionedin this way and are probably for generalstorage,or they appear at levels too low to have been used from the floor of the house and are more likely foundation deposits. The "libation tables" and "tablesof offerings"have been convincingly identified as olive presses. The rooms under which the tombs were located appear to have been used for ordinary,domestic purposes. This is emphasized in the study of the small finds in the rooms of House A (fromthe excavations in the Center of the City, 1980-81)under which Tomb 1068 was discovered (Yon,Lombard,and Renisio
1987:72-83).Nothing found in either the room overlying the chamber or the one in which the entrance to the tomb was located (or in the two small rooms adjoiningthe latter)suggested anything relatedto funeraryrites.All the evidence suggests that the rooms were used for ordinary day-to-day purposes (74).
Implications What are some of the implications of these findings for the study of the Canaanite and Israelitecult of the dead? First, the tombs of Ugarit should no longer be used as archaeologicalillustrations of a Canaanitepractice of making post-funeral offerings to the dead. This is significant because of the discernable influence the traditionalinterpretation of the tombs has had on the reconstructionof funerary practices at Ugarit. The assumption that there was strong archaeologicalevidence of an active cult of the dead has colored the interpretationof several passages of the Ugaritic texts, including, in particular, the funerary text KTU 1.161,certain parts of the Aqhat Epic (KTU1.17.1:2634 and parallels;1.19.3:40-45);the texts related to the institutioncalled the marzeah(KTU1.114;1.21, etc.), and the Dagan Stelae(KTU6.13 and 6.14).In fact, none of these literary sources provide
unambiguous evidence for the practice of giving regular water/food offerings to the dead at Ugarit. Although this cannot be taken as a sure indicator that such offeringswere not regularlymade, it is now clearthat one must be very cautious about discussing such activities at Ugarit. There is simply less evidence about Ugaritic funerary practices and beliefs concerning afterlifethan has been generally supposed. This new understanding of the Ugaritictombs also has implicationsfor the use of Ugaritic materials in drawing parallelsto nearbycultures,including the culture of Late Bronze Age Canaan in Palestine and the culture of Iron Age Israel.Scholars must not only examine the parallels between Ugaritic culture and that of PalestinianCanaanand later Israel,but also the differencesbetween them. Evidence suggests that funerary practice and beliefs concerning afterlife may be an areain which therewere significant contrastsbetween Ugarit and the rest of Canaan, and the archaeological evidence should be an important element in the discussion of this possibility. For example, Ugaritic funerary practice is characterizedby burial within the city and burial in vault-chamber tombs under houses. Both of these characteristicsare strikingly different from those of LateBronzeAge Palestinianand Iron Age Israeliteburial practice.Intramural burial did occur in Middle and Late Bronze Age Canaan, but the practice declined significantly early in the Late BronzeAge and disappeared completely well before the end of the period In addition,LBintra(Gonen1992:20-21). mural burials are exclusively pit burials ratherthan burialsin constructedtombs. In fact, only five second-millennium vaulted tombs, vaguely similar to those at Ugarit,have been found in Palestine-three at Megiddo, dating to the Middle Bronze Age, and one each at Dan and Tel Aphek, dating to the Late Bronze. While the three MB tombs at Megiddo were found within the city,neitherof the LBtombs was inside a settlement(Gonen 1992:139-41).The three tombs from Megiddo are not in any way representative of typical burial customs at that site or of customs anywhere else in Palestine,
and they are listed by Gonen (1992:2122) as evidence of a small foreign population at Megiddo during this period. By far the most common forms of burial in LB Palestine were burial caves for multiple interments and individual pit burials,both types located in cemeteries outside the settlements(Gonen1992:9-20). As far as I am aware, the Ugaritic practice has been found elsewhere only at Ugarit's dependencies, Minet el-Beida and Ras ibn-Hani,and is not characteristic of any other excavated sites in Syria or Palestine(SeeGonen 1992:20-21; 27-28; evidence a similar LB for possible practice has been found at TellHadidi, Syria [Dornemann 1979:117-118;147-49]). Furthermore,such practices are not attested at all in IronAge Israel(BlochSmith 1992:25-62). It can hardly be doubted that this style of intermentsays something significant about the Ugaritic understanding of death, something distinctive from those cultures that placed their burials outside their settlements;but this fact rarely,if ever, has been noted in discussions of Canaanite and Israelitefunerary customs. These kinds of contrasts must be taken into consideration when making use of Ugaritic evidence to illuminate Canaanite and Israelitebeliefs and customs. Re-assessment of Schaeffer'spostulated funerarycult at Ugarit should also lead to a reevaluation of the evidence adduced for post-funeralofferingsto the dead in ancientIsrael.The assumed presence of libation installations at Ugarit made it easy to propose that such practices also occurredin Israel,even if there was very little evidence to substantiate the idea. Ribar's study (1973) of the archaeologicalevidence for externalcult of the dead in Iron Age Israel is a case in point. In spite of the exceedingly small evidence for post-funeralofferings in or around LateBronzeand IronAge tombs, Ribarmaintained no doubts that such offeringsregularlytook place (1973:54-55; 63). With the loss of the only site that appeared to show large numbers of tombs with libation devices, it seems appropriate to cast a more skeptical eye on the very few tombs in Israelthat have been interpretedsimilarly.
Finally,this study should remind us that archaeologicalinterpretationsof previous generations need periodic review so that older misconceptions may not continue to distort current studies. Such reviews do not diminish the achievements of those pioneering scholars, on whose shoulders we all stand, but serve to remind us of the continuing imperfection of our understanding of the cultures of the ancient Near East.
Acknowledgement I thankDr.MargueriteYon,Directorof the Mission Arch&ologique Franqaisede Ras-Shamra-
to reproduce Ougarit,forgrantingpermission the photos and plans in this article.She and
theexcavation archivist, T.Monloup,provided me with new printsof the photos when the originalnegativeswere still extant.I express my gratitudeto them both.
Notes 1Installationswithin the tomb and accessible only fromwithin, such as the pits or jarsset withinthe floorand the niches,arenot discussed here,exceptas theybearon the issueof an exterior,post-funeralritualforthe dead. Thereis no doubtthatfood and drinkofferingswereplaced
in thetombat thetimeof eachburial.Thepits
within the tombsand the nicheswere probably used in the ritualsinvolved in the funeral, and the jarsand pots left in the tomb presumably containedfood and liquid for the newly deceased.The questionwe deal with hereis whetherthereis evidence for post-funeral offeringsin the tombs. 2 Although
many tombswere found in the
excavations followingWorldWarII,Schaeffer rarelydiscussed them in his reports.This is the caseeven with the royaltombsfound in the palace,which have yet to be publishedin any detail.A new study of the royaltombs is currentlyunderway (Yon1990:443-46). also fig. 3, p. 112;fig.4,p. 3 TombII (1934:115; also fig. 5, p. 117and fig. 6, 115),IV (1934:116; p. 119),(1938:317; fig. 42, p. 314;for a clearer
ideaof whathe is referring to,seetheplanin Courtois1979:130), andLVI(1938:228; alsofig. 29, p. 234) 4 See, for example,Schaeffer1931:2-4,where a
well-builthouseis interpreted as a funerary buildingbecauseit is relatedto a tomb.Note the plan, p. 3, fig. 1. In Schaeffer1932:4-6,the
authordescribeswhatis dearlya storehouse
and interpretsit as a huge cultbuilding.By the thirdcampaign,Schaeffer(1932:11)was convinced thathe was excavatingthe royalnecropolis of Ugarit,and thatthe buildingsaround
thetombsweresanctuaries forthedivinized kingsof thecity.Anothergroupof housesare
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
35
were the familytombs.The necropolisis gone. 6Schaeffer'sfailureto explicitlydropthe notion of a necropolisat Minetel-Beidahas led to a long termmisunderstandingaboutthe nature of thatsite in the literature.Fromrecentyears, such books as van der Woude,ed. 1986:273 and Curtis1985:19-22still referto the necropolis at Minetel-Beida.Note also the uncertain referenceto the "royalcemetery"in Spronk 1986:144,n.2.
Wayne Pitard is Associate Professor of Hebrew Bible at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Many of his publications have dealt with ancient Syrian culture and have included historical studies of Damascus and the Aramaeans, as well as epigraphic editions of Ugaritic tablets. He is currently writing a book on Canaanite and Israelite concepts of death and afterlife.
identifiedas collectionsof roomsfor fertility ritualin Schaeffer1933:106-108. 5 In the reporton the sixth seasonof excavations,Schaefferfirstmentionshis new understandingof Minetel-Beida(1935:168).He has not yet droppedthe idea of a necropolisat the site,but he was awarethat therewas a city theretoo. Forthe firsttime, he begins to identify buildingsas houses and storagebuildings (169-70).Schaefferdoesn'texplicitlydescribe the relationshiphe saw between the necropolis and the city,but it is clearthathe assumed the vaulted-chambertombswere the primary elementof the cemetery.In this report(16970),he arguesthatTombsI, IIand VII,which were locatedwithin buildingsthathe now identifiesas houses,were only constructedafter thehouseswereabandoned.Althoughhe does not say it, it seems thathe believedthat the "necropolis"succeededthe domesticoccupation of that partof the site. In the reportof the seventh season,however,even this appearsto havebeendropped,as he cameto see thatmost houses at Ugarithad an associatedmasonry tomb (Schaeffer1936:148).Now he describes Minet el-Beidaas a town just like contemporaryUgarit,with straightstreetswhich cross one anotherperpendicularly, with storehouses, shops, and houses under the floorof which
36
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
7 The "votivecascade"seems to be closely related to this kind of drain.It appearsto represent two phases of a drainagesystem which seems to go througha wall (stillpreservedon the rightof the photo),likedrain1107.Theforeground of the photo is presumablythe street. 8 The most widely publishedphoto of a vertical tube is the one in Schaeffer1933:pl.IX,4, which he identifiedas a conduitfor fertility libations( pp. 106-8).It is now clearthat the buildingthe pipe was in was a substantialindustrialcomplex,at leastpartiallyused for the productionof olive oil. This may be seen in the photographsin Schaeffer1933:pl.XIII,1 and 3. Two olive oil presstablesarevisiblein photo3, and photo1 shows a standardweight used in the olivecrushingprocess.In the photo showingthe pipe,it is dearlysituatedabovethe floorlevel and is standingnext to a melange of potteryscatteredon the floor,next to a stairway. It is likely thatit served some utilitarian purposewithin this industrialcomplex,rather thana ritualone. 9 See,forexample,thediscussionof threephases within the house of the High Priestin Salles 1987:186.Therethe tomb (T.103,originally, TombXI),belongsto the earliestphase andwas long out of use by the time the finalhouse was builtover it. A similarsituationis found with TombLm (Schaeffer1938:205-208, also pl. XX, 1), anotherMB IItomb,with an earthenpit nearbyHerethe pit is situateddirectlyin front of the doorwayleadingintothe room.Thisunlikelyspot suggeststhatthe currenthouse foundationsdo not belong to the same period. 10It is unlikelythatpost-funeralofferingrituals were held within the tombs themselves. Withthe exceptionof a few 13thcenturytombs, the Ugaritictombs were very difficultand uncomfortableto enter,with a small entryway and tiny door.Thiswould make opening and enteringthe tomb for regularofferingsvery In addiinconvenient(cf.Salles1987:167-168). tion,the plansof undisturbedtombsin which the positionof the finalbody placedin the tomb couldbe determinedshow thatthe dead were usually placedpartiallyin frontof the door into the burialchamber.In orderto enterthe tomb and carryout regularritualsinside the chamber,one would always have to scramble over the body of the most recentlydeceased occupant.See the plansin Schaeffer1938:207, fig. 8; 221,fig. 18;and 230, fig. 25. 11 Tombswith holes in theirceilingsinclude Minetel-BeidaII(Schaeffer1929:292,also 291,
fig.4), RasShamraTombsI (Schaeffer1933:115; 1939b:pl.XVII,1;also p. 87, fig. 80), VI (Schaeffer 1935:156-157; also pi. xxxii, 1 and 3), VIII also 136,fig.4 and 138, (Schaeffer1937:134-135; fig. 5), L (Schaeffer1938:314,fig. 42), a tomb in a chamberof the city wall nearthe palace (Schaeffer1951:7;also p. 5, fig. 1);the eastern chamberof the RoyalTombsin Room 28 of the palace(Schaeffer1951:17,fig. 8);the tomb in theGrandBatiment(Margueron1977:175-179; pl. VIII,2, 3; see esp. p. 176,fig. 13;Margueron 1983);and Tomb1068(Salles1987:164-65) 12Oneshouldnote,however,that,unlikeTombL, the plunderersof RasShamraTombI apparently also uncoveredand opened the dromosto remove the valuablesfrom the tomb (Schaeffer Thisis, of course,similarto the situa1933:115). tion discussedin the precedingparagraph. 13TheseincludeTombVIII(Schaeffer1937:135); TombXXXVI(Schaeffer1937:149, fig. 14;1938: 199-200,fig. 3, coupe CD);TombXXXVII(Schaeffer1937:139,fig. 6);TombL (Schaeffer1938: TombLMII (Schaeffer1938:206); pl. XXXIII,2); apparentlythe royaltombsin the palace(Schaeffer1951:17,fig. 8, coupe AB);Tomb1068 (Salles1987:159;see the discussionon this issue in Salles 1987:159) 14Sometimesthe recordedfloorlevels areeven higherthanthat (e.g.TombLIV,Schaeffer1938: 213-2.85m. below the floorlevel),but theseare probablyothertombs thatbelong to an earlier phase than the houses thatnow cover them. 15It is impossiblein thisarticleto dealwith the literaryevidenceforfunerarypracticesat Ugarit. Thiswill be dealt with in otherpublications. However,I would arguethatnone of the texts usuallycitedas evidencefor post-funeralfeeding of the dead actuallyreferto that practice. Significantly,Lewis (1989:esp.53-97),Schmidt and van der Toorn(1991),while (1991:83-199) disagreeingon the interpretationof severalof the Ugaritictexts,all have emphasizedthe fact thatmanyof the textsregularlyviewedas related to cult of the dead do not, in fact,have much to do with funeraryaspects of life at all. 16Offeringscould, of course,have been made in a differentlocation,perhapsat a temple.This seems somewhatunlikelyat Ugarit,however, since an advantageof having the family tomb withinthe houseshouldbe thatone couldmake theregularofferingsat home and not have to go to an outside spot to do so. When tombs are locatedin cemeteriesoutsidea city,a convenient spot within the town makes sense, but it is difficultto propose(withoutany evidence)that offeringswould be made in localesdistantfrom the tombwhen the latterwas locatedwithin the family'sresidence.Whateverthecase,the issues dealt with in this paper arenot dependenton solving the problemof whetherpost-funeral offeringsto the dead were made at Ugarit. 17The interpretationof holes in the ceilingsof a few tombs in LBCanaanand IronAge Israel as conduitsforpost-funeralofferingsis as prob-
lematicas that at Ugarit.I plan to deal with this issue in anotherpaper.
Bibliography Bloch-Smith,E. BurialPracticesandBeliefs 1992 Judahite abouttheDead.Journalfor the Study of the Old TestamentSupplement Series123.Sheffield:JSOT. Callot,O. 1983 Une maisona'Ougarit:Ltuded'architecturedomestique. Ras Shamra-Ougarit 1. Paris:EditionsRecherchesur les Civilisations. 1987 Les huileriesdu Bronzerecent'a Ougarit.Pp. 197-212in Lecentrede la (1978ville:38&me44nme campagnes 1984).Ras Shamra-Ougarit3. Paris: 6ditionsRecherchesur les Civilisations. Calvet,Y. 1981 Installationshydrauliquesd'Ugarit. et l'eauen Pp. 33-48in L'homme e et au Proche-Orient. Mdditerran Ed. J.Metraland P.Sanlaville.Lyon: Maison de l'Orient. Calvet,Y.and Geyer,B. 1987 Ueau dans l'habitat.Pp. 129-56in Lecentrede la ville:38&me-44nme campagnes(1978-1984).RasShamraOugarit3. Ed. M. Yon.Paris:Editions Recherchesur les Civilisations. Courtois,J.-C. 1979 Uarchitecturedomestiquea Ugaritau Bronzerecent.Ugarit-Forschungen 11:105-34. Curtis,A. 1985 UgaritRasShamra.GrandRapids: Eerdmans. Domemann,R. H. 1979 TellHadidi:A Millenniumof Bronze Age City Occupation.Pp. 113-51in Archaeological Reports fromtheTabqa DamProject-Euphrates Valley,Syria. Editedby D. N. Freedman.Annual of the AmericanSchoolsof Oriental Research44. Cambridge:American Schoolsof OrientalResearch. Gonen,R. 1992 BurialPatternsandCulturalDiversity in LateBronzeAge Canaan. AmericanSchoolsof Oriental ResearchDissertationSeries7. WinonaLake:Eisenbrauns.
Lewis,T.J.
1989 Cultsof theDeadin AncientIsrael and Ugarit.HarvardSemiticMonographs39. Atlanta:ScholarsPress. Margueron,J. 1977 RasShamra1975et 1976:rapport prdliminairesur les campagnes d'automne.Syria54:151-88. 1983 Quelquesrdflexionssur certainespratiques fundrairesd'Ugarit.Akkadica 32:5-31.
de Moor,J.C. 1976 Rapi'uma-Rephaim. Zeitschift fiir die 88:323-45. alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Pitard,W.T. 1978 The UgariticFuneraryTextRS34.126. Bulletinof theAmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch 232:65-75. Ribar,J.W. 1973 DeathCultPracticesin AncientPalestine.Ph.D.Diss.Universityof Michigan. Salles,J.-F 1987 Deuxnouvellestombesde RasShamra. Pp. 157-95in Lecentredela ville: (1978-1984). campagnes 38&me-44?me Ras Shamra-Ougarit3. Ed. M. Yon. Paris:EditionsRecherchesur les Civilisations. Schaeffer,C. E-A. 1929 Les fouillesde Minet-el-Beidaet de RasShamra(Campagnedu rintemps 1929):Rapportsommaire.Syria 10:285-303. 1931 Les fouillesde Minet-el-Beidaet de RasShamra:Deuxiime campagne (Printemps1930):Rapportsommaire. Syria12:1-14. 1932 Les fouillesde Minet-el-Beidaet de Ras-Shamra:Troisiemecampagne (Printemps1931):Rapportsommaire. Syria13:1-27. 1933 Les fouillesde Minet-el-Beidaet de Ras-Shamra: Quatriime campagne (Printemps1932):Rapportsommaire. Syria14:93-127. 1934 Les fouillesde Ras-Shamra:Cinquiime campagne(Printemps1933): Rapportsommaire.Syria15:105-31. 1935 Les fouilles de RasShamra-Ugarit: Sixiime campagne(Printemps1934): Rapportsommaire.Syria16:141-76. 1936 Les fouilles de Ras Shamra-Ugarit: Septiamecampagne(Printemps1935): Rapportsommaire.Syria17:105-48. 1937 Les fouilles de RasShamra-Ugarit: Huitiime campagne(Printemps1936): Rapportsommaire.Syria18:125-54. 1938 Les fouillesde RasShamra-Ugarit: Neuviime campagne(Printemps1937): Rapportsommaire.Syria19:193-255, 313-34. Textsof RasShamra1939a TheCuneiform Lectures1936.LonSchweich Ugarit. don: OxfordUniversity. 1939b UgariticaI. Missionde RasShamra3. Paris:PaulGeuthner. 1951 Reprisedes recherchesarchdologiques ARasShamra-Ugarit:sondages de 1948et 1949et campagnede 1950. Syria28:1-21. Schmidt,B. B. Dead:TheOrigin 1991 Israel'sBeneficent andCharacter ofIsraeliteAncestorCults andNecromancy. Ph.D.Diss. Oxford University. Sj6berg,A. K. 1965 Beitriigezum sumerischenW6rterbuch. Pp. 63-70in Studiesin Honorof
BennoLandsberger on his 75thBirthday, April21,1965. Editedby H. Giuterbock and T.Jacobsen.Assyriological Studies 16. Chicago:Universityof Chicago. Spronk,K. 1986 BeatificAfterlifein AncientIsraelandin theAncientNearEast.AlterOrient und Altes Testament219. Kevelaer: Butzon& Bercker. van der Toorn,K. 1991 FuneraryRitualsand BeatificAfterlife in UgariticTextsand in the Bible. Bibliotheca Orientalis 48:40-66. Wiichter,L. 1967 Der Todim AltenTestament. Stuttgart:Calwer. van der Woude,A. S., ed. 1986 TheWorldof theBible.Trans.fromthe Dutchby SierdWoudstra.Grand Rapids:Eerdmans. Yon,M. 1990 RasShamra-Ougarit1988-89(48e-49e campagne).Syria67:442-49. Yon,M., Lombard,P.and Renisio,M. 1987 Uorganisationde l'habitat:les maisons A, B et E. Pp. 11-128in Lecentrede la ville:386me-44&me (1978campagnes 1984).Editedby M. Yon.RasShamraOugarit3. Paris:EditionsRecherche sur les Civilisations.
CONFERENCELUD
TheArchaeology of Israel
thePast, Constructing thePresent Interpreting 22-24,1994 May
Topics: archaeology in contemporary Israeli society and culture; archaeological discoveries and ethnic identity; archaeology, biblical texts, and historical interpretation; and highlights from excavations at Tel Miqne, Hazor, Dor, and Bet Shean.
WilliamDever, Speakers:AmnonBen-Tor,
Trude Dothan, Amos Elon, Israel Finkelstein, Baruch Halpern, Brian Hesse, Lee Levine, Burke Long, Peter Machinist, Amihai Mazar, Michael Notis, Miriam Peskowitz, YaacovShavit, Neil Silberman, David Small, Ephraim Stern, Paula Wapnish,and BenjaminWright. For information: Contact the Philip and Muriel Berman Center for Jewish Studies, Lehigh University, 9 W. Packer Avenue, Bethlehem, PA 18015 (phone 610-758-3352, fax 610-758-4858, e-mail [email protected]).
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
37
A
Medieval Church
in
Mesopotamia
By Michael and Neathery Fuller
Al Hasake* "Tell
A Aleppo
hen MedievalIslamicgeographer Yaqutal-Hamawi described Tuneinir,he reported a settlement in a forested valley, populated by farmers and herdsmen from the Bani Salamahand Bani Ghadirantribe.Al-Hamawi's brief description hardly does justice to a site that served a mixed population of farmers,merchants, and nomads for over 5000 years. We journeyed to northeasternSyriaduring 1986to survey the 60 ft. high mound. TellTuneinirwas an importantIslamictown. Today,it is an unoccupied mound situated 25 miles east of the Iraqiborder and 19 miles southeast of the modem town of Hasake, Syria. The surface of Tuneiniris littered with thousands of pottery sherds ranging in age from first
38
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
0
%0
Syria
* Damascus
r
millennium BCEuntil approximately 1400 CE.Soil stratanear the base of the greatmound, probed during 1990-1993, extend A pottery sherd recovback until the third millennium BCE. ered during 1990 raises the likelihood that the deepest layer will trace the site's origin to the Neolithic Period. We were looking for a complex, stratifiedsociety thathad thrivedfor severalcenturies;TellTuneinir was ideal. The site of Tuneinirconsists of a large mound, a lower town, and a group of low mounds situated on the site's easternmargin. The total areaof the site is 112.7acres. We planned our firstmajorseason of excavation for the summer of 1987and focused on the large mound. One well preserved, low mound was designatedas AreaMi and scheduled for testing during the summer of 1988. One colleague made the plausible suggestion that the low mound was built over graves. An alternative hypothesis, that the low mound was part of the town's defenses, was based upon the historicalreferences
to Byzantine fortificationsagainst Saracen attacks from east of the KhaburRiver.Our goal in excavatingthe low mound was to determineif either hypothesis was preferable.
* " w, . ,
..
PAW,
low-,
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
39
andMichaelFullerwork Neathery
at the draftingtableat TellTuneinir. MichaelFullerreceivedhis Ph.D.
fromWashington Universityin St.
Louisin 1987and is currentlyAssociate Professorof Anthropologyat St. LouisCommunityCollege-Florissant Valley.In additionto his workin Syria, Mike has participatedas a surveyor/ architecton excavationsin Greece, Jordan,Egypt, and the USA. He currently serves on the Boardof the St. LouisSocietyof the AIA,and is a pastpresidentof thatSociety.Neathery FullerreceivedherMA fromWashington Universityin St. Louisin 1985and is an adjunctfacultymemberat St. Louis CommunityCollege.She specializesin the applicationof computer graphicsand database analysisto archaeologicaldata.Neatheryhas participatedas an archaeobotanist and glass experton excavationsin Greece,Jordan,and the USA. Photoby DarrenWaddell. All otherphotosandillustrationsweresuppliedby theauthors.
Neither skeletonsnor militaryequipment came to light as we excavated so we needed to formulate a new hypothesis for the low mound's function.Our best due came at the end of the 1988season, when we detected the faint trace of an inscription on a brick. Only one word, written in Syriac (the language derived from Aramaic and still used by Christian communities in the Middle East),can be dearly translated. The word translatesas "hope."Associated with the inscription is the symbol of the cross.The inscription,general absence of domestic debris, and east-west orientationof the building in Area 1I provided the basis for a new hypothesis: the low mound was a ruined church. It took only one day of excavation during 1989 to yield a conclusive answer. Below a foot of topsoil were mudbricks that defined the eastern extremity of the building. The pattern formed by the mudbricks was a curved wall or "apse."We clearedthe soil from the interiorof the apse and uncovered two distinctoutlines (one superimposed on top of the other)for the base of an altar.The discovery of the apse and altar footings caused great excitement among our students and workmen because now the function of the building was unmistakable. 57:1 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
41
? s!?
, si•l?
:4. :'
ss?
••
.... ? ??.
..., ?:• :•:?•
si!•=
.......
? ?, ?, =, • i??... ...?,? ?• ??,,???=•?•• =?•....•
,:! I?" :?•
:
ss ?? i=• ?i
???•? s?
,?,??
cm.
o
42
?
y
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
?•?•:i:=:!i!
A set of three stepsconnectedthe aspe to the churchnave whichmeasured28 x 34 feet.Severalday oil lampsand four bronzecoinscalleddirhemwerefoundon the floorof the nave.Thecoinsweremintedin the cityof Sinjaraduringthe reignof 'Imadal-DinZangiand bearthe imageof a double-headedeagle.Coinsand lampsdate the building's collapseand abandonmentto the beginningof the 13thcentury. Thearchitectural featuresof the churchat TellTuneinir to correspondclosely thetraitsattributedto the SyrianOrthodox churchesin theTurAbdinregionof Turkeyandin Mosul,Iraq.A smallroom immediatelysouthof
Phase4
Phase 2
--
-
Phase 1
Phase3
the apse is used as a sacristy forstorageof sacredutensilsand an identical situation occursin the churchat Tell vestments; Tuneinir. Excavation 1992 beneaththe 12thcentury during floorof the sacristyexposedan ovenanda deteriorated woodenbreadmoldusedin the manufactureof eucharistic bread. Thenave of the latest(phase4) churchat TellTuneiniris neatlydividedinto two distinctbaysby a set of pilastersthat probablysupportedthe roofand createdseparatesectionsfor men and women.TheSyrianOrthodoxchurchesin Mosul divide the nave into two sectionswith the west (rear)halfreservedforwomenandtheeasthalf(nearthe altar)reservedfor use by the men;the sameis trueof churchesin the Tur'Abdin regionof Turkeyand theCopticchurchof Abu Sargahin Old Cairo.Thedivisionof thenaveforthemen andwomenis also practicedby the Assyrianchurchesin Mosul. Largediscoloredportionsof the plasterfloorin the nave indicatedthattwo chandelierslit the west bay while only one chandelierhungin the eastbay.Theoutlineof the largeststain was six-lobedand was formedby the drippingof a six lamp Weinterpreted thesmallstainsalongthe northand chandelier. southwalls as the resultof spillsfromthe glazedlampsthat were commonlyused duringthe 12thand 13thcentury. Tracesof mudbrickwallsalongthe west edge of thebuilding belongedto a narthexwherethe unbaptizedindividuals and personscensuredby the churchcould listento themass and receiveinstruction.Threeroomson the southside of the sanctuarywereprobablypartof an open airchapeland chambersfor a priest. BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
43
1?
:?czwz~cl~hrr ~rjiJII~W ~~k~11111913LPZ~u~ -,?/rPTc? .;.:.- ~,i;n?---;2;?`?; r
.;
~ i(
???r-.+F:.J
~? ??$1;? ::: fil,
~Y;.L i ".?? ..~'~ ?., ~71 :y.?~
..?
C j0
-~-C~L~ldlt~L~?
I;?i
-?
i
?.r
;9f;54\:::
rj ''
?,.
i
~
~??; ~r?~
/r?;? '
??r
8
...
?1
7
rU--
~??? ~ C~:
i
~:$
L.li?
J?.?.i
---
-?
?ji Si
r ~. 5;? ????
#~ ~L?' ~
'' r 1. ,* ':1::
rs 31: iic?, t
'rl ?i:
C?
L\
s~n
??-
~/lnl~snaa\;~\~;~;?l\ 5;
~-?;c. :I
.r
c
r
i.! ?? ???.., ~? -?r??vr~C_-c ~P~': iI-. i. r
'
~
?;
r
,'
I
'' ~:I I
12thCenturystucco lintel(reconstructed)
We uncoveredseveralvery specialartifactswhen we removed the balks of unexcavated soil in the interiorof the church. The balk due west of the apse contained fragments of an elaboratelymolded and painted stucco lintel; the fragments had been reused in the three steps that lead from the nave into the room which contained the altar.The rectangular-shapedsacred room that contains the altar is called the haikal(Aramaicfor 'temple")by
SyriacspeakingChristian communities in Syria,Turkey, and Iraq.The design of the lintelfragments,which we estimate to be 900 years old, is the enshrined cross flanked by rosettes and pin-wheel/whirl designs.
5 cm,
.. Zr ": ir
?
Z~
-
a i-i
~ ',i
..
"
'?'
.
~?-
i~??
t
?.?-
h
-?rr
~
*'r .. :~gi~ i? '$ c?
I -?.~j
~L- $
?, ~? " ?-
r. YL. ~
?~ 6?;:. x: --?? w\-"LLCi ~-?;~ ?X ir%: r~W~ .?;";?i
1P; :~?
?du
`.3
~L1 362 y~LiC~;h: .e ~-s: JE
4 i ~~d: n t~t?:':* r^5`
~I 1
~; :~?
""'
~rL 3?~
te
ii~ . I''e cm.r~llc
';s; ?r~kxa~i
ii ~::~:;: ur*r
i~j~i i??~-~;?~;:?c~??~?;?~ i
Our most exciting discovery came during the 1990 when we excavatedbeneath the plasterfloor of the haikal.We quickly identified two buried floor surfaces that belonged to earlier phases of the churchand recoveredcharcoalsamples that yield calibratedradiocarbondates of 651-686 CEand 654-690 CE. Three fragments of a painted lintel were discovered beneath the 12 century plaster floor.The pieces fit together and form a 7th century lintel that is 5 feet in length. The lintel is decorated with a large, paint-ed cross flanked by two smaller painted crosses. Faint outlines of incised spirals and birds are visible on the surface of the lintel. The mudbrick church at Tell Tuneiniris dwarfed by the stone churches at sites in Syria such as Resafa-Sergiupolis, Qalb Loza, and Qalaat Semaan. The few published references to mudbrick churches include the 3rd century house church found at the site of Dura-Europosand a mudbrick church that
44
57:1 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
aC~jli? -IY II
'ArC~=
ft.
i: \-
g-(
4>
Cra
)'itr-
~ ~ ?c~~?q
?x~s~.~ ~?~az?, ;hC
?
Vjr
7th Centurypaintedlintel
01 cm.
was in use during 1876 by a small Syrian Orthodox community of Ain Karamin Iran. The 1990, we uncovered a 12-13th century mosque that was contemporaneouswith the mudbrickchurch.The mosque, a bath, a market, and a khan (an inn and warehouse for merchants) were excavated along the southern mar-gin of Tell Tuneinirduring the 1990, 1992, and 1993.A group of Americans assisted by a representativeof the DirectionG6ndrale des Antiquit6s et des Musees will return to Tell Tuneinirto continue exploration of the site's history.
Furtherreading An overviewof thehistory,architecture, andritualof theEastern Churchcanbe foundin: AzizS.Atiya
1968 A Historyof Christianity. London:Methuen& Co. Ltd. A new re-examinationof the ancientchurchesand monasterieslocated in the regionof TurAbdin,Turkeyis containedin: Andrew Palmer 1990 MonkandMasonon theTigrisFrontier. London:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Syrian Christianity Christianityappeared in the firstcentury as an offshoot of the many Jewish commturitiesin the Roman province of Syrian Syria. Until the second century,the province extended from the Tau-rusmountains to Arabiaand Egypt, and east to the TigrisEuphratesrivers. Its culture was influenced by PersianMesopotamia. The first churchesappearedin Damascus, Antioch, Sidon, and Tyre;Adiabene and Edessa had Christiancommunities by the second century.SyrianChristiansgenerally spoke Greek near the coast (Antioch, Beirut)and some form of Syriac(a late Aramaic dialect) inland. Syriac-speakingChristianityflourishedmost from the fourth through the seventh centuries,when authors like Aphrahat, Ephrem,Philoxenos,Jacobof Sarug, and Narsal helped createa language and culturefor the churchesthere,employing the nowregnant Edessan dialect. Imperialand private donations helped establish large churches,schools, and monasteries,including the massive and still-standingshrinesof Simon the Stylite,nearAleppo, and Sergius of Resafa.In the fifth century,ecclesiasticalleaders began translatingGreekpatristictheology to combat the followers of Marcion,Mani, and various Gnostics, and to clarifydoctrine regarding the person of Christ. Controversiesover Christology led to the division of Syrian Christianityinto three majorbranches:East-Syrian,centeredin Seleucia-Ctesiphone,which followed the theology of the Anti-
ochenes, including Nestorius; West-Syrianin Edessa and later southwestern Anatolia, which rejectedthe Chalcedonian for a CyrillianChristology;and "Melkite,"or imperial, which was in union with the patriarchateof Constantinople in accepting the firstseven ecumenicalcouncils. Later,under Muslim rule, all three were tolerated,and early Muslim society was greatly influenced by the SyrianChristianswho filled its learnedbureaucracy.By the eighth century,East-Syrianshad established missions eastward on the silk route as far as China. Beginning in the tenth century, Syriacliteraturedeclined under pressurefrom Arabic,despite a twelfth and thirteenthcentury renewal. The Syrian churches endured in Ottoman lands until the twentieth century when, due to political strife following World WarI, SyrianChristiansbegan to emigrate. They now live in diaspora mainly in Sweden, Germany,the U.S., and Australia. However, Syriac-speakingChristiansstill are settled in Syria, TurkishKurdistan(the Tur'Abdin),and Israel,which countries also have Arabic-speakingSyrianChristians.In addition, Syrian Christiansflourish in South India, where Syrian Clhristianity apparentlyestablished a mission in the fourth century RobinDarlingYoung The Catholic University of America
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
45
The Minoan Origin of Tyrian Purple By Robert R. Stieglltz
Tyrianpurple,alsoknownas'royalpurple,'wasthemost expensivedye in the ancientworld qensen1963).Indirectevidenceaboutits valueis providedby Ugaritic in whichvarioustypesof dyed textsof the 14thcenturyBCE, woolensarelistedwith theirprices.Someof thesetextiles wereevidentlydyed withTyrianpurple,as theirhigherprices Homerusedthespecialterm wouldsuggest(Stieglitz1979:19). to refer to thisdye (Odyssey6.53: haliporphyros,'sea-purple', in order to 306),perhaps distinguishit frompurple-dyeimiwe know that tations.By the timeof Diocletian,in 301BCE, wool dyed with Tyrianpurplewas literallyworthits weight in gold, as is statedin his EdictonMaximum Prices24. was a liquid, Thebasicrawmaterialforthedye production obtaineddirectlyfromthe hypobranchial glandsof Mediterraneanmollusks.Theshellfishutilizedin thisdye manufacL.(=Hexaplex) andMurex turewereprimarilyMurextrunculus haemastoma L. brandaris L.(=Bolinus). A thirdvariety,Purpura Each shellfish was used (=Thais), producedonly occasionally. a few dropsof the precioussecretion,which was thenboiled in saltwaterto createthe dye. In orderto produceTyrian purplein commercialquantities,manythousands of shellfishwere required.Pliny,writing in the firstcenturyBCE, The three types of purple shells, providesthe only from left to right:Murextrunculus, actualrecipeforthe Murexbrandaris,Purpurahaemastoma. of thedye preparation Thesespecimenswere excavatedby solution.He reports the authorat CaesareaMaritima.Israel. (Natural Histony Scaleis in centimeters.Photographs by thatin order 9.62.135) theauthorunlessnoted. to dye 1,000poundsof wool, it was necessaryto use some200lbs. of Purpuraflesh as well as 111lbs.of (histermfor thisshellfishwas bucinum), fromthe larger In this the was extracted process, gland murex. small were crushed,shelland shellfish specimensonly.The Such a was also observed earlierby Aristotle all. procedure the fleshmass (it was cookedfor nine days!),producedthe Animalium The entire (Historia 5.15.22-25). mass,withwater, was thenplacedin leadenvatsandsimmered.Theexposureof notoriousstenchforwhichthisindustrywas notedin antiqthe liquidto light,coupledwith theprolongedsimmeringof uity.Pliny(Natural History9.60.127)also statesthatin his day 46
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1(1994)
the best Tyrianpurple in Europe was produced in Laconica and the best in Africaat Meninx. In Asia, the best dye was manufactured at Tyre.
The bay of Palaikastro, with the headland in background.
BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
47
According to current theories, the production of Tyrian purple was originated and monopolized by the coastal Canaanites-those people called Phoenicians by the Greeks.
Since these shellfish had to be caught by ratherlaborious fishing and/or diving in shallow water, the price of the dye, as noted above, was enormous. Therefore,a great variety of dye substituteswas in use during Greco-Romantimes, as we know from an ancient papyrus that lists recipes for producing purple dye substitutes (Lagercrantz 1913).These imitations were produced from plant as well as mineral sources. Still, none were as color-fast as the true "royalpurple," hence the continued demand in antiquity for textiles colored by this highly prized dye.
.Crete;. I-
? ??I --- '•" .i ......... ., . "--. ..,
in a greatvarietyof Thedyecouldbeproduced
- "!"."6.
...
_, t
-
r
shades, depending upon the mixture of the different shellfish utilized. Variationscould also be made by chemical means, such as light conditions and reducing agents. The resultingcolors included red, blue, and dark purple, the latterbeing considered the most noble of the tints. All shades were utilized primarily to color ceremonial garments. Two of the best known ; ". * "3. examples are the purple stripes on the Roman toga purpureaand the blue stripes on the Jewish tallit 'prayershawl'. The Hebrew name for this blue dye was tekelet(Exodus 26:11;see Ziderman 1987), and we may note here that according to Rabbinicrulings, only the true tekelet dye (made from mollusks) should be used for coloring the prayer shawl (ToseptaMenachot9,16). These religious rules were probably a response to the use of substitute dyes.
-
tPalmiknro
I4.
juanon
l- awow
*
.3 ' U S UO
.
. O':0 7S
" U
-'-
This development presumably occurred sometime in the Late Bronze Age (1550-1200 BCE). Indeed, the earliest archaeevidence for Canaanite ological purple dye production-the heaps of discarded shells and their fragments-are those unearthed at Minet el-Beida (the harborof Ugarit), dated to the 15th-14th century BCE; Sareptaand Tel Akko (13th cen-
?:o.-.ckSe
--Il:i
Cl,• '; 12:,q ++,,... ,,.-:"... :. ... 7:i:.-•+ LIf:,.
+:-:.*:.. ;:-.
n, ..' ,.,.--
'::?": "-.... ,
-
.?~
4.. 7c " ,-? . .. . .... . .,:-. ,. ::,: 7•.i.; .'., ,. '. " .' ,"
..
..
.-
,,
.
,
"..
." " . .-. ... . ,
,
:.
,
--.:.
.
-
it
-
... . ..
.
_" :
, 7" -
.. . ' • ,• ' ..
..
7
..
. ..
.. • .
. - •. . , . -., . .....
rr
ne
:
-: ?
. " _ .
d
lK ia
'?T , -
. ..
,
....JOWL .
-U W
?-
r
po
*AC
2apw
.Jltx&'
4
VA.
Karmon and and at Tel Keisan (11thcentury BCE; tury BCE); Spanier 1988:184).There are, however, archaeologicaland epigraphic indications from the Aegean, which suggest that the 'royal purple' industry was first developed there,by the Minoans on Crete,before 1750 BCE. The current scholarly theories attributingto the Phoenicians the origin of the Tyrianpurple industry can actually be traced back to the Roman era. The Greek rhetoricianJulius relates a charming tale Pollux, in the second century BCE, (Onomasticon1.45-48) of how the hound of Herakles bit into a murexfish on the shore at Tyreand thus discovered its dye. Herakles then divulged this delightfuldiscovery to Phoenix, the king of Tyre.This took place, accordingto Pollux, some seven generationsbeforethe war at Troy. Now in the Roman era it was quite fashionable to discuss and theorize on the origins of all sorts of inventions. The purple industry-which was still quite an active art in that era-was not exempt from these speculations. Indeed, the Romans had themselves developed techniques for the artificial breeding of murexand other shell-fish, in rock-cutpools called piscinae.A fascinating description of how to construct such fish-ponds, adjoining a sea-side villa, is provided by Lucius Junius Moderatus Columella (De Re Rustica 8.16.7), about 60 BCE.The origins of the Tyrianpurple industry were, therefore,of some interest to the Romans. However, evidence
OIL..
The hill of Kastri at the Minoansite of Palaikastro, EastCrete,from the south. Thetown is locatedsouth of the hill.Thesite offereda largesurface depositof Murexshells.
unearthed in the Aegean at the turn of the twentieth century suggested that the purple dye industry originated on Crete. The first archaeologicalevidence of purple shells, constituting the debris of purple dye production, was already reportedby HeinrichSchliemann(1880:115)at Troy.In 1903, the BritisharchaeologistR C. Bosanquetfound numerous murexfragments at a Middle Minoan site on the small island of Kouphonisi,off the southeast coast of Crete (Bosanquet 1904:321).However,he describedthe details of his finds only within the text of an unrelated article,which he published 37 years later (Bosanquet 1939-40).In 1904, Bosanquet also found purple shell remains at the large Minoan site of Palaikastroin EasternCrete.He thereforeproposed that the Minoan purple dye industry,dated to the Middle Minoan era (2000-1600BCE), preceded the Phoenician industry,but few accepted his opinion. We should note here that the murexshellfish are edible, and when they are found in small numbers, such as at the Early Minoan site of Myrtos (Warren1972:263),they are presumably associated with the diet and not with the dye. But it is also likely that these Early Minoan fishermen also discovBiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
49
41?
N6 41
.-j
41tv
'Avg
*#.%14%
ered the dye, in the same way that the hound of Herakles did many centuries later. In 1981, I set out to investigate sea-purple origins by analysis of pertinent archaeologicaland epigraphic data, startingwith a coastal survey on Crete.At Palaikastro,which is identified with ClassicalHeleia, I found a large surface deposit of murexremains on the southern slopes of the Kastri. Most of these were fragmentary,but some were small whole shellfish. These are, presumably,from the same deposit noted by Bosanquet in 1904.In addition, numerous murexare located within the remains of a well-built stone structurelocated on a headland in the bay southeastof the Kastri. On the islandof Kouphonisi,which is identified with Classical Leuke,I succeededin locatingthe Minoan site visited by Bosanquetin 1903.It is situatedon the slope of a hill overlooking the northshoreof the island.Besides the murexremains, pottery fragments, and foundationsof a large stone structure, it should be noted thattherearequitea few obsidian chips on the surfaceof the site. The water source for the modern fisherman is now located on the shore directly below the Minoan site. It was presumably also utilized in antiquity,for near it are remains of substantialindustrialfacilities.I believe that these are the remains of an actualpurple dye factory,probablydated to the Hellenistic era. At that time, the island of Leuke was a center
50
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
On the north shore of Kouphonisi. The MiddleMinoansite is midway between the chapelon the hilland the beach.
Murexfragments from the south slope of the Kastriat Palaikastro.
Murexfragments fromthe headland in the bayof Palaikastro.
C
4 ?r r
C.? .,~.'CLL"~ ~? ?
i
?-
-??. ~?i
9t~; C --;??--
?ne
??;
Y
:? .' .t
*
''
~,
i. C??
rr )?
;5~?e
I'
_ -T
Stone structure remains at the Minoansite on Kouphonisi.
Remains of stone basins and well, nearthe shore on Kouphonisi.
of Tyrianpurple manufacture,as is known from Cretan (Guarducci1940:104). inscriptionsof the second centuryBCE These manufacturingremainsnear the water source include stone and clay vats, as well as basinsand channelsfor the handlingof liquids.The locationof the site on the shore near a water source is ideal, since both sea-waterand fresh-
water are requiredin the dye production. Some excavations of the Greco-Romantown of Leuke, located on the shore west of this area, have been undertaken (Papadakis 1983), but as far as I know, the industrial site itself has not been excavated, and its date is thereforestill speculative. In addition to Palaikastroand Kouphonisi, murex
The modem water source at Kouphonisi: a stone chamberwas builtoverthe spring.
remains have also been found at other Aegean Bronze Age sites. These include the Middle Minoan levels of three major sites: Kastrion the island of Kythera (Coldstreamet al. 1973: 36, 282), Knossos itself (Hutchinson 1962:239)-presumably from a near-by factory on the shore-and at the palace of Mallia (Vogler1984).In the Late Helladic era, we find murex remains both in and outside of Greece:at TroyVI, dated to about 1425 BCE(Blegen 1937),and at Hala Sultan Tekkeon
as. -it
*".
~i-
.:
Remains of a large stone-cut vat, about 2 m. in diameter(below). Viewin frontof the brokenspout (above).
Cyprus, dated to the Late CyprioteIIIperiod (Reese 1987:205). Akrotiri,on Thera,has now yielded remainssuggesting "probable local production"of purple dye (Aloupi et al. 1990),dated to Late Minoan IA, ca. 1550 BCE. To this archaeologicalevidence from the Aegean, we should also add a significant epigraphic find. The Mycenaean Greek termpo-pu-re-ia 'purple'is found in severaladministrativeLinear B tabletsfrom Knossos, which deal with textile allocations. One of these tablets (KN X976) actually contains the expression wa-na-ka-te-ro po-pu-re-[I 'royal purple'. This is the first written attestationof a term which in later ages became synonymous with 'Tyrianpurple'. It is significant that this term is first attested in a Mycenaean Greek text from Knossos. The ClassicalGreekroot porphyr-is used to designate both the mollusk and its dye, but it is not an Indo-Europeanword. Astour (1965)proposed, unconvincingly to my mind, to derive this term from a Canaaniteroot *parpar meaning 'to churn, to boil'. However, the Canaaniteword for the purple mollusks was evidently hillazbn-a word of unknown origin attested only in TalmudicHebrew.The actual Phoenician terms for the shellfish and its dye are still not attested. As for the Mycenaean term porphyr-,I would suggest that this was originally a Minoan word, borrowed by the Mycenaeans when they learnedfrom the Minoansto produce the dye. It may well be that Minoan art has preserved depictions of garmentsdyed with 'royalpurple'.Probablythe best known
Minoan sarcophagus, dated to about 1450 BCE,is the one found at Hagia Triadathat illustrates elegantly dressed men and women. Theirgarments are decoratedwith purple stripes of various shades. A famous Minoan priestess figurine, 1600 also has what appearto be purple decorationson her attire, BCE, as do the dresses of the noble ladies depicted on the frescoes of Thera,about 1550 BCE. After Minoan power on Crete was supplanted by thatof the Greeks,Trojans,and the MycenaeanGreeks,about 1450BCE, the peoples of Anatolia continued to produce the purple dye. We should recall here the Homeric reference(Iliad4.141) to purple coloredivory (!)used by Maionianand Carianwomen. The Troadtradition of Tyrianpurple manufacturewas also noted by Aristotle(HistoriaAnimalium5.15.547),who mentions the waters off Sigeion, Lekton, and Caria as being rich in purple shells. The Canaanite dye industry in the Levant was certainly not a monopoly. Indeed, the Greeks, Phoenicians, and others continued to manufactureTyrianpurple throughout antiquity. By the Romanera,it was alreadyunknown who had first invented the 'royalpurple' dye, and it was only then attributed to a mythical Phoenician source and dated to the era before the Trojanwar. The archaeologicalevidencenow availablefromthe Aegean suggests that this industry was not of Mycenaean, nor of a Canaanite origin. It indicates that the Minoans on Crete and some Minoanized islanders, such as those on Kythera,were already manufacturingsea-purple in the Middle Minoan period, ca. 1750 BCE.It also seems certainthat this dye was being produced by the people of Thera at the end of the Middle Minoan era. The Mycenaeans,Trojans,Cypriotes,and Canaanitesthen continued to develop this industry in the LateHelladic period. The Bronze Age Canaanitesand their Iron Age Phoenician descendants were not the actual originatorsof this dye. It was most likely a Minoan contribution,developed before 1750BCE, which was then adopted by others, including the CanaanitePhoenicians.
p
.
.
....
:i?: , ?-..
"•;
?•
.,,
?
,
Priestess from Akrotiri fresco, Thera,ca. 1550 BCE. She boasts red and purplestripeson herdress.
Acknowledgements '.
.
fl r-
"
.
-.
'
DI
This is a revisedversion of a paperfirstreadat Citieson the Sea-Past and Present:1stInternationalSymposiumon Harbors,PortCities and CoastalTopography, Haifa,September22-29,1986;and at the 1989Annual Meetingof the AmericanSchoolsof OrientalResearch(Anaheim,CA), November21, 1989.My conclusionswerefirstreportedby TheStar-Ledger, Newark,NJ,on February8, 1982,p. 14.The fieldworkon Cretefor this paperwas made possiblewith the aid of a grantfromthe RutgersUniversityOfficeof Researchand SponsoredPrograms,to whom I should like to expressmy sinceregratitide.
.
h1r ,
Bibliography .
Aloupi, E.,et al.
foundatAkrotiri. 1990 Analysisof a PurpleMaterial Pp.488-490in TheraandtheAegeanWorldIII,Vol. 1:Archaeology.Proceedings of the ThirdInternationalCongress,Santorini,Greece
1989),editedby D.A.Hardy,et al.London:Thera (September Foundation.
Hagia Triada sarcophagus, ca. 1450 BCE, depictingfuneraryrituals. Thegarmentsof the mournersbearcoloredstripes.
BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
53
?'
'
?.•
11
Robert R. Stieglitz received his Ph.D. from Brandeis University in 1971. He has excavated in the U. S., Greece, and Israel and has surveyed throughout the Mediterranean world. Dr. Stieglitz is the recipient of numerous academic honors and awards and the author of some one hundred articles on the ancient Near East and Mediterranean. Formerly curator of the National Maritime Museum, Haifa, he is now excavating on the Mediterranean coast of Israel. Stieglitz has taught at universities and institutes in Greece, Israel, and the United States. Currently, he is Associate Professor of Hebraic Studies at Rutgers University, Newark, New Jersey.
Astour,M.C. 1965 The Originof the Terms"Canaan,""Phoenician,"and "Purple."Journalof NearEasternStudies24:346-350. Blegen,C.W. 1937 Excavationsat Troy,1937.American JournalofArchaeology 41:553-597. Bosanquet,R.C. 1904 Some 'LateMinoan'Vasesfound in Greece.JournalofHellenic Studies24:317-329. 1939-40Dikte and the Templesof DictaeanZeus. Annualof theBritish SchoolofArchaeology at Athens40:60-77. Coldstream,J.N.,et al. 1973 Kythera: Excavations andStudies.ParkRidge,NJ:Noyes. Guarducci,M. 1940 Contributialla Topografiadella CretaOrientale.Rivistadi Filologia18:99-107. Hutchinson,R.W. 1962 Prehistoric Crete.Baltimore:Penguin. Jensen,L.B. 1963 RoyalPurpleof Tyre.Journalof NearEasternStudies22:104-118. Karmon,N. and Spanier,E. 1988 Remainsof a PurpleDye IndustryFoundat TelShiqmona. IsraelExploration Journal38:184-186. Lagercrantz,O. 1913 PapyrusGraecus Holmiensis. Recepte fuerSilber,Steineund Uppsala-Leipzig. Purptur.
54
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
Note elaborately Minoan snake-goddess from Knossos,ca. 1600 BCE. decorateddresswith its faded stripes,originallyof darkblue. Papadakis,N.P. 1983 KoufonisiIsland:Delos of the LibyanSea.Archaiologia 6:58-65 (Greek,with Englishsummary). Reese,D.S. 1987 PalaikastroShells and BronzeAge Purple-DyeProduction in the Mediterranean Basin.AnnualoftheBritishSchoolof at Athens82:201-206. Archaeology Schliemann,H. 1880 Ilios:TheCityandCountryof theTrojans. London: Stieglitz,R.R. 1979 CommodityPricesat Ugarit.Journalof theAmerican OrientalSociety99:15-23. Vogler,H. 1984 Die SpurenfriiherFierbereiim Minoerreichauf Kreta. Deutscher Fierber-Kalender 88:193206. Warren,P. in Crete.TheBritish 1972 Myrtos:An EarlyBronzeAgeSettlement Schoolof Archaeologyat AthensSupplementaryVolume7. Thamesand Hudson. Ziderman,I. 1987 FirstIdentification of AuthenticTek6let. Bulletinof theAmerican Schoolsof OrientalResearch 265:25-33.
fifty may eventually be separated. Despite their state of preservation,the script remains remarkablylegible. In addition to the scrolls,carbonized basketry,textiles, copper hinges (or clasps), glass fragments, small bronze chains, and burned wooden discs were recovered from the charcoalmatrix. Biblical ArchaeThese finds indicate that the papyrus (ACORNewusletter 4:1,5:1,
Catherine Valentour,formerly of the Smithsonian Institution,and Dr. Zbigniew Fiema, chief archaeologist of the Petra Project,with the assistance of staff archaeologist Deborah Kooring. The scrolls were removed from the floor of the room adjoining the church during some three days under the threatof rain. A second lot of carbonized text rolls was removed a week later. The scrolls were examined in early January 1994 by Dr. Ludwig Koenen, the H.C. YoutieProfessorof Papyrology at the University of Michigan, and former president of the American Philological Association. His inspection revealed that they are of a type characteristic of the Byzantine period, and unroll vertically(fromtop to bottom) rather than horizontally (transversacharta). The texts are in a single column on the
[March/April]). The currentexcavation is being conducted in areas flanking the basilica in advance of the construction of a protectiveshelter over the site. The ACOR Petra Projectincludes archaeological excavation, the conservation of the recoveredmosaics,and the construction of the shelter which is currently being designed. The texts are in the form of papyrus scrolls which, when rolled, measured some 30 cm long and perhaps some 5-8 cm in diameter.Unrolledthey may have been several meters in length. The state of preservationof these firstpapyri from Petra does not compare with that of the famous Qumran scrolls. While the latter were well-preserved,the Petrascrolls were carbonizedin a firewhich destroyed the superstructureof the adjacentchurch and affected the area of the building complex where they were kept. The scrolls were found beneath nearly four meters of stone from the superstructure of the building, crushed under and between the charcoalremains of the shelving on which they had apparently been stacked. This building, like the church,collapsed in an earthquake, perhaps that which affected Petra in 551 CE.Because of their flattened and carbonized condition, the actual number of scrolls has yet to be determined. A conservative estimate suggests that
inside of the rolls,predominantlyacross the fiberof the papyrus. In two instances, scripthas been noted on both sides of the papyrus. The arrangementof the texts on the scrollsindicatesthat they aremore
News,
Notes,
Discovery
of
Papyri
and in
Reviews
Petra
ACOR Assistant Director By Glen L. Peternnman, number of papyrus texts of major significance were found at Petra in December 1993 following two months of excavationin areasimmediately adjacent to the ByzantineChurch.The church excavation of 1992 and 1993 produced spectacularmosaics in the aisles of the churchwhich have been widely reported
A
47:2 ologyReview20:1;andArchaeology
p,
,J
Excavationof the papyriin room adjacentto the basilica. Pictured (leftto right:Suleiman Mohammed,NayefZaben,Dr.ZbigniewFiema,MohammedNuweijeh,CatherineValentour; (upperright)DeborahKooring.
rolls were stored in textile "sleeves" and/or wooden "tubes"or boxes, possibly with inlaid glass decoration. The excavation of this sensational find was conducted by conservator
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
55
likelypersonalwritingssuch as sermons, letters,or contracts.Dr.Koenenhas noted in his initial investigation that "the use of this format precludes that the Petra rollsareliterarybook rolls,"such as plays or biblicalbooks. Moreover,when the churchat Petrawas in use, "liturgicalas well as literarybooks would have been written in codex form." The scripts have been identified as a cursive Greek "documentarystyle" typical of the 5th-6th century. It is now dear, througha close examinationof the handwriting, that more than one person was involved in writing them. Because the writingsareon the inside of the scrolls (they have yet to be unwrapped) the textis readableonly on isolatedpapyrus fragments. Some translatedwords seem to referto a spiritualor tangibleheritage; an agreement or contract(which confirms the documentary characterof the writings);and one word has been translatedalternativelyas "by fire"or "relatedto wheat." Another fragment
refers to a "king."Stillother fragments have yielded tracesof what may be numeric abbreviationsor documentary symbols. This suggests that some rolls may contain informationwhich could reveal the economy of the region. A non-Greek script found on some fragmentshas yet to be confidentlyidentified. It may be some form of Aramaic script or a very late form of Nabatean. The most significant fragment is translatableas "FlavianusPatriarchus." This apparently refersto Flavianus, a patriarchof Antioch. After the Synod of Siden in 512 CE,he was banished to Petraby the Byzantinemonophysite emperorAnastasiusfor alleged heresy and lived therefor the last six years of his life. The precise nature of the text in which the heretic'sname is mentioned is unknown. The documentarynatureof the script may indicate that it is a letter to or from Flavianus. This enigmatic yet significant reference from the Petra scroll collection
Ad-Deir
Petra 1. 2. 3. 4.
0.
5. 6. 7. 8.
7 .-
strengthens the suggestion that the recently excavatedbasilicamay be the seat of the bishop of PalaestinaTertia-which is known from historictexts to be located in Petra-and that the adjacentstructure in which the scrollswere found was perhaps a monastery. ACORis requestingthe financialsupport of the academic community and the privatesectorto see that these papyri receiveimmediateattention.Althoughit has been determined that the inner portions of the scrolls should be largely salvageable by modem conservation and restorationtechniques,the papyrus rolls are extremely fragile and in need of immediateconservation measures. ACOR is now assembling a committee of internationalexperts to undertake the delicatetask of conservationand is in the process of immediately raising $250,000for its estimated initial cost. We urgently request that ASOR corporate members, supporters and friends consider "adopting a scroll"through a
--S,.
ByzantineChurch Qasral-Bint GreatTemple Templeof the Winged Lions PavedStreet/ Gate PalaceTombs CityWalls TheTreasury
sCros
e
0
2
The Siq O
.5
KM
56
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
o
.
*****
4
p
ab "4k.
,L
1'
-
i
$5,000donation for emergency conservation. It is criticalthat this extraordinary glimpse into the history of the early church be preserved for scholarly researchand for future generations. Excavationsat Petra arebeing conducted by the American Center of Oriental Research(ACOR)in cooperation with the Departmentof Antiquitieswith the purpose of enhancingand broadening the touristicattractionof Petra.ACOR is supportedin the endeavorby the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities in Jordan. ACOR's Petra Projectis financed under a grant by the United States Agency for InternationalDevelopment (USAID) in Amman. ACOR Director Dr. PierreM. Bikaibecame overall director of the PetraProjectin May 1992when its director,Dr. KennethW. Russell,died tragicallyjust as the excavationwas to begin. Dr. Russell had previously conducted archaeologicalexcavations at Petra and discovered and recorded the site in 1990. Fieldwork is being led by Dr. Zbigniew Fiema, chief archaeologist in charge of excavations, with the assistance of Mr. Suleiman Farajatof the Department of Antiquities. ACOR gratefully acknowledges the assistance of H.R.H. Prince Ra'ad bin Zeid, Chief Chamberlainof the Royal Court,former Ministersof Tourismand Antiquities, Abdul Karim Kabaritiand Yanal Hikmat, of the present minister Mohammed Affash al-Adwan, of the former Secretary-Generalof the Ministry of Tourism, Nasri Atallah, of the Director-Generalof the Department of Antiquities Dr. Safwan Tell,Dr. Ludwig Koenen of the University of Michigan, and Dr.FriedrichZink,conservatorof the Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology at YarmoukUniversity
Scrollfragments being removed (topphotograph) Nuweijeh, by(leftto right)Mohammed SuleimanMusa(bottomphotograph) CatherineValentour,and SuleimanMusa.'"Technical-man" with in situ carbonizedscrolls.
57:1 (1994) BiblicalArchaeologist
57
A
Tribute
to
Siegfried
H.
Horn
28,1993 17,1908-November Mawch
In Memoriam member of the AmeriAncaninvolved Schools of Oriental Research, a contributorto its Newsletter,Bulletin, and BiblicalArchaeologist,a former trustee of ACOR in Amman and its director during 1970-1971,and a former director of a CAP-approvedarchaeologicalfield projectin Jordan,SiegfriedHerbertHorn, was laid to rest in the St. Helena Cemetery on December3,1993. Dr.Horn was buried near his retirementhome in California'sNapa Valley,afterhis unexpected death five days before of complications from massive lymphoma, a condition no one knew he had. In fact, at the same time that his physicians were trying to figure out what was wrong with him, he was planning to be at the Annual Meeting of the American Schools of OrientalResearchthen taking place in Washington, DC. Eighty-fiveyearsbefore,Siegfriedhad been born to Albin and KlaraHorn in Wuerzen, Germany.Albin was one of the world's first aviators, a pilot trained by Bleriot.Klarawas a devout Seventhday Adventist Bible worker.From his parents,Siegfried inheritedboth a sense of adventure and a commitment to his church.He received his undergraduate educationat FriedensauSeminaryin Germany from 1926 to 1928, and Stanborough ParkCollege in Englandfrom 1929 to 1930. Horn's active professional life was divided into two unequal parts by six and a half years of internmentas a prisoner of war duringWorldWarII,from 1940to 1946.He was interredfirstbythe Dutch in Indonesiaand then by the English in India.From 1930 to 1940, Horn served as a minister in the Netherlands and a missionaryteacher/ administrator in the Dutch East Indies. During his internment,and indeed his whole life, it can be said of him as it was of Edward Robinson, the noted explorerof Bible 58
Biblical 57:1(1994) Archaeologist
lands, that "he used freely whatever lay open to be freely used. But he took the learning of others, whether dead or living, not for a Jacob'spillow to sleep on, but for a Jacob's ladder to climb by" (quoted in F.J. Bliss, Developmentof Palestine Exploration, p. 203). Upon gaining his freedom, Horn immigrated to the United Siegfried H. Hom (March17, 1908-November28, 1993) at States and quickly workas objectsregistrarat the dig he initiatedat TellHesban completed his formal (1973). Photocourtesyof the SiegfriedH. HornArchaeological education at the follow- Museum. ing institutions:Walla WallaCollege in WashingtonState,(B.A. probablybe best rememberedfor his role in 1947);SDA TheologicalSeminarythen as a Biblicalarchaeologist. In particular, in Washington,DC, (M.A. in 1948 with he is remembered for the influential dig he initiated and directed at Tell Hesban, a thesis,'"he TopographicalHistoryof biblical Heshbon, in Jordanduring the Palestine According to the Egyptian summers of 1968, 1971, and 1973, and AsiaticLists and OtherSources");andwhere he continued on as senior advisor after a brief stint with W. E Albright at and objectregistrarin 1974 and 1976. Johns Hopkins University-the OrienBefore this he was a core staff member tal Institute of the University of Chicin in 1951 with of the TellBalatah,biblicalShechem, dig (Ph.D. ago Egyptology in 1960,1962, and 1964,and continued, a thesis, "TheRelation Between Egypt with those he had trained,on the Madaba and Asia During the Egyptian Middle Plains Projectin Jordanright up to the Kingdom"). 1951 to Horn at the time he died. 1976, From taught In Philip J. King's history of ASOR, SDA TheologicalSeminary,firstin Washand then at Andrews American Uniington, DC, Archaeologyin theMideast in he started an archaehe (1983), remarked that versity MI. There museum named for (later him), ological was foundingeditorof AndrewsUniversity 'The archaeologyof Jordanowes an initiated the debtof gratitudeto the extraordinary SeminaryStudies, Seminary's doctoral programs,led renowned study Hesbanexpedition,especiallyforits tours to the Middle East, and authored pioneeringeffortsin manyareasof some 800 books and articles--mostly in research.... Hesban archaeological denominational periodicals. He retired was thefirsttrulyinterdisciplinary in 1976 as Seminary Dean and Profesundertakingin Jordanon a large sor Emeritusof Archaeology and Hisscale.... TheHesbanarchaeologists of deserve specialrecognitionforhaving tory Antiquity. Outside his denominationHorn will publisheda full preliminaryreport
eachseasonbeforereturningto the fieldforthe nextseason.Throughits fieldschoolHesbanhastouchedalmost everydig in Jordanby servingas the traininggroundforscoresof graduate students,severalof whom [ca.201 now directtheirown projects.... In alltheseachievements theHesbanprohas fulfilled the objecject admirably tivesof ASORas set down in ASOR's originalstatementof purposeand its laterrevision"(pp. 193,194). Horn would be the firstto recognize thatit took teamworkto accomplishthese things, but those who worked with him recognize that he deserves a great deal of the credit. It may be of interest to provide a partiallist of participantsassociatedwith the projectat TellHesbanwho areknown in the scholarly world as archaeologists or Biblicalscholars:SabriAbbadi,Abdel Samia Abu Dayya, James Battenfield, Dewey Beegle,PhyllisBird,Gazi Bisheh, Michael Blaine, Roger Boraas,Robin Brown, Reuben Bullard,Douglas Clark, Vincent Clark,RobertCoughenour, PatriciaCrawford,John Davis, Bert DeVries, Carney Gavin, Lawrence Geraty, JenniferGroot, GerhardHasel, Larry Herr,Robert Ibach,Zeidan Kafafi,Muhammad Khadija,Lutfi Khalil,Nabil Khairy,0ystein LaBianca,John Lawlor, Harold Mare, David Merling, Larry Mitchel, Eugenia Nitowski, Mogahed Mohaisin, Thomas Parker,Ghassan elRamahi,Mahmoud Rusan,JamesSauer, WilliamShea, BjomerStorfjell,Abraham Terian,Henry Thompson, Michael Toplyn, WilliamUrbrock,Lloyd Willis,BastiaanVanElderen,KennethVine,Donald Wimmer,Udo Worschech,Nathaniel Yen, Randall Younker,and Fawzi Zayyadine. When one reviews such a list, one recognizesthe wide influenceof one man who will be sorely missed in the world of Syro-Palestinianarchaeology. Colleagues have twice tried to acknowledge theirdebt to him by publishing Festschriftenin his honor. The first was TheArchaeologyof Jordanand Other Studies,edited by L. T. Geraty and L. G. Herr (BerrienSprings,MI:Andrews UniversityPress,1986).The second is in press: TellHesbanAfter25 Years:Continuityand
PlainsofJordan, Changeon theMadaba only when it has ended in death. Death editedby L.T.GeratyandDavidMerling not merely ends life, it also bestows (BerrienSprings, MI:Andrews University Press, 1994). It seems appropriateto recall the words of Hannah Arendt: "Human life, because it is marked by a beginning and an end, becomes whole, an entirety in itself that can be subjectedto judgment
upon it a silent completeness, snatched from the hazardous flux to which all things human are subject."That being so, Siegfried Horn's life is now whole and complete. Those of us who knew him are the richer for it.
Lawrence T.Geraty
NORTH AMERICAN ARCHAE OLOGI ST Editor ROGERW. MOELLER
RegionalAdvisoryEditors JAMES E. AYRES VERNON G. BAKER VAUGHNBRYANT,Jr.
JOHNL.COTTER
RICHARDD. DAUGHERTY MICHAELA. GLASSOW ALBERTC. GOODYEAR ROBERTAS. GREENWOOD JAMES B. GRIFFIN MARTHALA'ITA J. JEFFERSON REID CARLYLES. SMITH RODERICKSPRAGUE R. MICHAELSTEWART DAVIDH. THOMAS JAMES A. TUCK CLAUDEN. WARREN WALDOR. WEDEL
AIMS&SCOPE North American Archaeologist is concerned with all aspects of American Archaeology. Geographically it covers the continent north of high cultures in Mesoamerica--the United States and part of northern Mexico. Topically it spans the entire range of cultural evolu-
tion in America from Paleo-Indian studies to Industrial Archaeology. Theoretical and methodologicalarticles, provided their data base is North America, are also accepted and research based on cultural resource management as well as work by state and local societies is State and Provincial solicited along with the more traditional ArchaeologicalSocieties JOHN PFEIFFER academic-museum projects. The editor Resource Managementand particularly encourages papers that cut ContractArcliaeology across regional or topical boundaries but EDWARDS. RUTSCH more specialized items are also welcomed. General Historical Archaeology
ROBERTL. SCHUYLER
IndustrialArchaeology M.VOGEL ROBERT Book Reviews JAY CUSTER
SubscriptionInformation: Pricepervolume- 4 issues yearly Rate:$112.00 Institutional Rate:$36.00 Individual $4.50 U.S. &Canada;$9.35 Postage&handling: elsewhere. ISSN0197-6931
NA9/93
ta"Sam* MLaa m/Ia(d4f Com4pimA Yupnraqust
Baywood Publishing Company,Inc.
26 AustinAvenue,P.O.337, Amityville, NY11701 Phone(516)691-1270 Fax(516)691-1770Ordersonly-cail toll-free (800)638-7819
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
59
Some and
In
Ivories on the Samaria Remarks other Iconographic Resources whichappeared winged sphinxes decorate a box on the a stimulating article
in a recent issue of this journal,Eleanor FerrisBeach used the Samaria ivories as iconographic resources for initself and for exterpretingthe marzead plainingbiblicalpassagesthatmight have been influencedby it. The remarksmade below respond to art-historicalmatters touched upon in the article. Beach singled out several motifs found on the Samariaivories: woman at the window, human-headed sphinx, cow and calf, winged figure holding a flower. In the art of ancient Egypt, the wingless sphinx representsthe Pharaoh (Pritchard1969:nos. 386, 393). Glyptic and sculptural evidence suggest that, in the second millennium BCE,the adaptation of the Egyptian sphinx with the addition of wings may have originated in Anatolia, ratherthan Syria (Canby 1975:234).During that period, both male and female sphinxes occurred. In Beach'sdescriptionof the banquet scene on the wall relief from Ashurbanipal's North Palace at Nineveh (1993:96), she states that "the woman at the window and lions adorn the couch, and
table between king and lady."Photographs of those carved decorations on the assyrianstone relief,takenby the present writerand reproducedin this article, disclose that the above-quoted description requiresmodification. The woman at the window motif does not occuron the squarepanelsattachedto the king's couch. Rather,each panel shows a pair of personages en face;a column stands between them.The human figures(attendants?) are posed with their right arms lowered and their left arms held across the waist. Below each figural grouping is a row of threecolumns. The small box (pyxis) set upon the table is decorated not with sphinxes, but with two winged human-headed bulls arranged back-toback. Iconographically,the bovine creature was a prerogativeof the Assyrian king and had symbolic significance (Albenda 1986:101-102).It should also be mentionedthatthe smalllions which embellish the royal couch may allude to the efficacy of the Assyrian king, since those animalswere the objectof the royal hunt (Barnett1976:pls. VII-XIII,L-LIII).
Thus the carved images which decorate the couch and box belong appropriately to the male sphere, in particularthat portion reserved for Assyrian kingship. To the corpus of furniturewith ivory decoration discovered at Assyrian sites, listed in Beach'sarticle,the assemblage discovered at FortShalmanesermust be added. These ivory panels were found conjoinedin theiroriginalsettingas component partsof stackedfurniture,all of which may have been chairs(Mallowan and Herrmann1974:3-9).One group of ivories shows females engaged in banquets at tables with food and drink; several ladies hold discs, and in one instance a lady is shown spinning. On four of the panels, a sphinx appears beneath the chair;however,Mallowan and Herrmann argue that these animals are male (1974:91-93).The authors examine the theme of the banquet in great detail and note several iconographictraditionsand interpretations(1974:11-16).Mallowan and Hermann conclude that, possibly, the assemblage of ivory panels were executed for the adornment of the queens' thrones that were intended for use in their apartments.
Bibliography
Albenda,P. 1986 ThePalaceof Sargon,KingofAssyria.
Series:Synthbses No. 22.Paris:EdisurlesCivilisations. tionsRecherches
Barnett,W. 1976 Sculptures fromtheNorthPalaceof at Nineveh(668-627BC). Ashurbanipal London:BritishMuseum Publications.
BeachE.E 1993 The SamariaIvories,Marzeakand BiblicalTexts.BiblicalArchaeologist 56:94-104.
Canby,J.V. 1975 TheWalters GalleryCappadocian TabletandtheSphinxin Anatoliain theSecondMillennium BC.Journal of NearEasternStudies34:225-48.
G. Mallowan, M.,andHerrmnann, 1974 Furniture fromSW.7FortShalmaneser.
Series:IvoriesfromNimrud(19491963).FasciculeIll. London:British
The royal banquet scene on a wall relief of Ashurbanipal (668-627 BCE)was discovered fallenfrom an upperchamberinto room S of that Assyrianking'sNorthPalaceat Nineveh.The stone reliefis presentlyexhibitedin the BritishMuseum(124920). Twodetailsare shown: (left), squarepaneldecoratedwith motifs in two registers,attachedto a leg of the king'scouch;(right), the smallbox carvedwith two winged human-headedbullsstandingback-to-back.Theobject is set upon a table located in front of the banquetingking.
60
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
in Iraq. Schoolof Archaeology Pritchard, J.B. RelatNearEastinPictures 1969 TheAncient SecondEdiing to theOldTestament. tion with supplement.Princeton: PrincetonUniversityPress.
PaulineAlbenda Brooklyn, New York
benefitted beginners. These include a glossary of key terms, a ScriptureIndex, and more and bettermaps. Actuallythere are only two maps, and they do not depict the topographical features of either Israelor Jordan.The firstprintingomitted page 80 and had several typographical errors.Fortunately,the second printing Handbook has alreadycorrectedthese problems. Though this book does not focus Walter 221 E. By pp. Philadelphia: Rast, directlyon the Bible,everyone interested Press in the Bible and archaeology will bene$15.95 1992; Trinity International, fit from it. In fact, Rast wisely includes (paper). both prebiblicaland postbiblicalperiods to increasethe usefulness of the volume. alterRastis well qualifiedto write Overall, the coverage is balanced, accuthis introduction. He is a field rate, and up-to-date. Therefore,it is a editor of The Bulletin archaeologist,past of pleasure to recommend this handy volTheAmerican Oriental Schools Research, ume as the best popular introductionto of The of Palestinean archaeology currently author/editor Expedition of the Dead Sea Plain Series, and teacher of available. In this he book covers undergraduates. Palestinian archaeology in 14 chapters. JamesC.Moyer The firstthreechaptersintroducearchae- Southwest Missouri State University ology, the land of Palestine (both Israel and Jordan),and the dating processes used by archaeologists. Chapters 4 through 14 cover the history and archaeThe World Social of ology of Palestine from the Stone Age to Islamic the (Chapter4) period (ChapModels for Luke-Acts: ter 14).A brief Epilogue, select Bibliogand the raphy, generalIndex conclude volume. This book can be highly recommendEdited by JeromeNeyrey, xviii + 436 ed as a textbook for beginning students pp. Peabody,MA:Hendrickson or an introductionfor nonspecialistsbePublishers, 1991; $19.95. cause most of it is written in an interesting fashion without technicaljargon. Chaptersaverageabout 15pages and are divided into brief units for easier readhis book contains a remarkableseries of essays prepared by a group ing. Rast employs a helpful pedagogical device, i.e., an occasionalparagraph, of scholars who named themselves The set off from the rest of the text, that sumContext Group. Their objective was to marizes essential information or lists develop a new rubric for studying the socialcontextof the Mediterraneanworld relevant chronological periods. For as reflected by biblical writers. Little example, the first of these paragraphs on page 2 explains three archaeological effortwas made to reconstructthis world terms: stratigraphy,typology, and balk. through the use of archaeological,epiThe bibliography includes many less graphic, artistic,papyrological, numismatic, or literaryevidence. Rather,an technicaljournalarticles(including sevendeavor was made to produce a handeral from BiblicalArchaeologist) and book containing basic social scientific annotates the most general books. A limited number of drawings, black and perspectives needed for "a historicalsocial reading of a first century Mediterwhite photos, and maps are also helpranean, biblical document" (p. xi). The ful for beginners. Still, there are several work itself is both insightful and conadditional features that would have
The Through in Palestinian Ages Archaeology: An Introductory
lA
Interpretation.
troversial. Although the articles in this book deal with Luke-Acts,the authors maintain that the same principlesmay be applied to other biblical materials as well. Luke-Actswas selected because, as John Elliott writes, '"Moredetail on the persons, groups, institutions, places, dates, and events surrounding Jesus and the early Christianmovement is contained here than in any other writing of the New Testament"(p. 210). Essentially,the essays examine the social and cultural patterns and processes of primary concern to the original audience.The approachis broadlysociological ratherthan historical.The authors pose a new set of questionsand thereby provide us with innovative insights into the Lucan material. Rather than identifying the author or his community, VernonK. Robbinsasks, "Whatcan we know about the social location of the thought of the implied author?"(p. 331). His answer is well worth reading. Other patterns studied are the countryside in Luke-Acts (by Douglas E. Oakman); sickness and healing (by John J. Pilch);honor and shame, first century personality, labelling and deviance theory(thesethreeby BruceJ.Malina and JeromeH. Neyrey);patron-client relations and the new community (Halvor Moxnes);the symbolic universe (Jerome Neyrey); rituals of status transformation (MarkMcVann);and meals and table fellowship (Neyrey). At points the titles of the chapters seem misleading. Forinstance,'"ThePreindustrialCity in Luke-Acts:UrbanSocial Relations" (by RichardRohrbaugh), proposes a model of an ancient urban system and applies it to the parable of the Great Feast in Luke 14:15-24.Rohrbaugh rightly deplores the anachronistic practiceof ascribing to ancient city life certain features of modern urban existence. Yet his paradigm fails to take into account much of the archaeological and epigraphic evidence for the complexity of cities and the ancient literary descriptions of city life in the first century CE(those of Dio Chyrsostom, Apuleius, Philostratus,and Josephus, to name a few). The essay does not in fact deal with Luke's view of the intel-
BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
61
lectual life of Athens (Acts 17:17-21),nor of the passionate loyalties of the artisan members in a guild of Ephesus (Acts 19: 23-40),nor of the civic power of women in Antioch of Pisidia (Acts 13:50),nor yet of the complexities of the religious establishment and the common people in Jerusalem.On the other hand, the authorincludes valuable materialabout social conventionsin firstcenturyPalestinian towns, including the significance of extending a second invitation. The models, though arrestingand stimulating,aresometimesoverly streamlined. Importantconsiderationsare omitted in a way which may impair our overall grasp of the subjectmatter.For instance, a most interesting polarity is developed between temple and household; and it is indeed a helpful framework from which to view the drama played out in Luke-Acts. Little is said, however, of the influence of the synagogues and of the piety which developed around them, though these houses of worship appearno less than thirty-three times in LukeActs. The Pharisees are viewed in theirattachmentto the temple ratherthan in theirfarbroaderrealm in the synagogues. Much is made of the privatesphere of women as over against the public sphere of men. "Honor"for a man consists in aggrandizing his public reputation, while for a woman it consists of "shame,"involving "sexual exclusiveness, discretion, shyness, restraint,and timidity"(p. 42).Yetin Luke-Actswomen are praised for theirpiety,faith,generosity, devotion, and positive response to the Gospel, ratherthan for their compliance with accepted social norms. Although Malina and Neyrey identify five examples in which women appear as 'properly'placed in the home, thereare many more instances of their appearance in public. The reader is invited to speculate as to the "shame"of Lydia, the seller of purple, "who is not identified as the wife of so-and-so"(p. 62).Yet historical and literaryevidence demonstratesthat some respectablewomen in certainsegments of the population functioned quite independentlyof men, managed their own businesses, and had considerable liberty to move about in 62
BiblicalArchaeologist57:1 (1994)
the outside world. The authors provide a fine analysis of Jesus' applause for certain women who invade the public sphere. Particularlyfascinating is the suggestion that the women described as e6otiovoc (of high standing)in Acts 13:50;17:2,14 "mightbe suggesting that Christianitywas attractiveto shameconsciouswomen, thatis, women whose reputations were spotless" (p. 64). If the paradigms at times seem too doctrinaireand too confining as tools for interpretingearly Christiandocuments, they are at the same time stimulating and productive in plowing new fields of New Testamentstudy.
Catherine C.Kroeger Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary
Dead Sea Scrolls The First Uncovered: Translation Complete and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents for over 35 Withheld Years The
By RobertEisenman and Michael Wise, 286 pp. Rockport,Mass:Element, 1992; $24.95.
Since
theirdiscoveryin 1948the Dead
Sea Scrolls have been the subjectof heated controversies.In the first forty years the controversiesrevolved around their identification.Thereis hardlya candidate, possible or impossible, or even the most preposterous, which has not been suggested as the authorand owner of the Scrolls.Indeed, the man who was the first to identify these manuscripts, E. L. Sukenik, proposed, barely two months after they came into his possession, to ascribethem to the Essenes, and within a shorttime thisascriptionbecame a consensus. Yet there are still scholars
who disagree and suggest candidates of their own. In recentyearsa new controversyhas erupted:what is the right policy of publishing the Scrolls?Shouldthe remainder of the documents be entrustedto certain scholars or should the whole lot be open to everyone? In September 1991,this polemic was resolved. The Huntington Libraryannounced thatwhoever wanted to could get printsof unpublishedScrolls. In Washington, D.C., two volumes of facsimileswere published,and soon the Israel Antiquities Authority followed suit and agreedto supply printsto everyone. Those that thought the controversies were behind us were proven wrong. The book under review raises questions of scholarlystandards-in decipherment, reading, and interpretation.Reading its title, the naive reader may think that only now are the Scrolls starting to be published, but this is not the case. Thus far 80%of the Scrollshave already been published (both by word count and by square inches), and only 20%are still awaiting publication.But the charge of disingenuityis even worse-abouthalf of the texts in this book have been fully published and another quarterwere publishedin a preliminarymanner.Thus the new material in this book does not exceed one quarter.Furthermore,in a letter signed by 19 of the world's leading Dead Sea scholars (from England, France,Holland,Hungary,and the USA), it was claimed that the authors of this book helped themselvesto the published material without acknowledging their sources. The only credit given is the inadequateexpression"formerdiscussion." No mention is made of reading, interpretation, and translation (often with a thoroughintroduction)exceptthe anemic and misleading "formerdiscussion." The interpretionof the material is also problematic.Professor Eisenman has made a name for himself as the propagator of the theory that the Scrolls are of Christianorigin, i.e., the Teacherof Righteousness is none other than James the brotherof the Lord,etc. One can cite innumerable reasons why Eisenman's theory should not be taken seriously, but one will suffice. Radiocarbontests taken recently proved that the bulk of
the Scrolls were not only composed, but copied before the Christianera. It is a small wonder that Eisenman was not able to convince even his coauthor of this theory as they both admit (page 7). Wise ascribes the libraryof Qumran to the Zealots.What they agree about is that the Scrolls have to do with a messianic movement. This is a meaningless distinction-at that time practically all Jews believed in the coming of the Messiah. Moreover, the number of Scrolls dealing with messianic themes is proportionately small-only about two dozen from a total of six hundred non-biblicalmanuscripts. One quarterof the texts in our book were deciphered and interpretedby the authors.Let us bring as an example one of these, a text Eisenmanand Wise chose to call "He Loved His Bodily Emission." According to them, it deals with a certain man by the name of Hananiah Nitos (in fact it is Nothos, a nickname that means "bastard"in Greek).Among his other misdemeanors,this Hananiah had scatologicaltendencies. These were so registeredin the recordsof the Mebakker (the Scrollsterm for overseeer)or bishop (here one sees Eisenman's predilection for Christianterminology).All this salacious interpretationis based on the readingof two words shefekhbesaro,an expression that has no more meaning in Hebrew than the English, 'shedding of his flesh.' Indeed, the text reads sher besaro, i.e.,this man was in love with his relative!And this is the end of disturbed Hananiah. It would be interesting to know what a Qumranite would think of this review. This is a difficult thing to imagine-not only due to the time differential,but also because a member of this community (an Essene according to our view) would have nothing to do with outsiders. But if it could happen he would have probably smiled and said, "How odd, the battle of the Children of Light against the Children of Darkness is still going on!" Magen Broshi The Israel Museum
mise under Neo-Babylonian rule. General readers should appreciate Bierling'sinclusion of pertinent ideas Due: and principal objects.He mentions that water resources,high ground, and close on the proximity to well-traveled thoroughfares appealed to settlers in antiquity Philistines (pages 36-38). The Phaistos Disk from an anthropoidcoffinlid fromBethCrete, Grand Rapids By Neal Bierling, 281 pp. and an Ashdoda figurine from Shean, MIEBaker Book House, 1992; $14.95 Palestine are among the photos. Line (paper). drawings of reliefs or reconstructions are also incorporated.Bierlingrefers to Egyptiantexts connectingthe Philistines Scholastic scrutinyhas been rigorously to invading Sea Peoples, as depicted in reliefsfromthe Ramessideeraat Medinetapplied to the Philistinesover the last decade. Affinities between them and Habu, and cites parallels between Homer's Iliadand I Samuel.The 7th cenor Anatolian continue peoples Aegean to come to light through the analysis of tury Assyrian exploitationof TelMiqneEkmn'solive oil industryis noted. He remainsfrom artifactualand architectural reviews pottery style development from excavations in Palestine, Anatolia, and island sites of the Mediterranean.The key Philistine sites. With three photos he shows imported CypriotMycenaean Philistines are considered to be one element of a general wave of people who IIIBware and its successors:Mycenaean the Late IIIB:IC Wareand Philistine bichrome to the Levant migrated during ware (pages 39-41). Through photos Bronze/early Iron Age transition,i.e., and text he highlights various sites, inNeal the 13th and 12thcenturiesBCE. much of this has summarized cluding Gezer, Arad, Lachish, Ziklag, Bierling researchin the present work. In a book Troy,and Tel Miqne-Ekronas they help designed for the "armchairarchaeologist" tell the Philistine story.He also provides he delivers the more salient and pubcommentary on items ranging from bovine scapula(page 88) to pim weights lished ideas pertinent to Philistine origination and territorialexpansion. He (page 143). The book condenses many recent utilizes scholars' commentary,excavastudies of the Philistines into a report tion results, the biblical text, and extraformat. In six of eight chapters Bierling biblical material to achieve this. This illuminates the Philistines through bibbook sheds its "new archaeological lical references.This is supplemented light on the Philistines"by focusing the with extra-biblicalsources and archaeowork of various scholars together into a concentratedbeam illuminating the logical data. However, too often he leans towardshis own predilections(page 130). Philistine question. He uses archaeologyto buttressthe idea The Old Testamentprovides the of the Bible's veracity (page 244), and basis for the brief overview in chapter he anachronisticallyrefers to Philistine 1. Chapter 2 features assessments and "city-states"centuries before the Greek glimpses of the work completed at Tel Miqne-Ekron.Thischapterincludesmaps, model (page 24). Severaladditionalphotos of the scattered ceramic finds would an isometric of the tell, photos, drawhave shown more clearly the style and ings, and personal comments from the motif similaritiesbetween Philistine biauthor's experience at the site. His perchrome ware and its antecedents. sonal experiences make this the freshest chapter in the book. Chapter 3 on Considering the mass of data BierPhilistineorigins provides a synopsis of ling reviews, this reader expected more of a conclusionthan "we also now underliteraryarchaeologicalmaterial relative stand that God used these 'pagans' not to the Philistines. Chapters 4-8 use the Old Testamentfor sequencing the Philisonly to test but also to preservehis peotines from the time of Joshuato their deple at various times throughout the Iron
Giving
His Goliath New Archae-
ologicalLight
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
63
I and Iron II periods" (page 249). The readershould gain from the author'senthusiasm, but his efforts would carry greaterweight and authorityif he himself were listed among the contributorsin the bibliography.
PaulSchreiber Flagstaff,Arizona
and
Religon in
Ancient
Culture Israel
ByJ. Andrew Dearman,xv + 281 pp. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1992; $19.95.
andCulturein AncientIsrael
ReligionAndrew Dearman combines a
by J. history of Israel (1-124)with an introduction to the Old Testament(125-263). Both provide good basic coverage of the materialnecessaryfor an introductory course.The historyprofilespremonarchic Israel(11-50),the monarchy (51-99),and postexilic Israel (100-124).The introduction analyzes Deuteronomy (125-52); Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel (153-198);Proverbs,Job,and Ecclesiastes(199-227);and Daniel (22864). Its language is readable and inclusive. Its documentationis thoroughwith concise summaries of standard works, generous referencesto German sources, and an index for modem authorsand for texts (269-81).Unfortunately,the bibliography (265-8)is selective,thereis no subjectindex, and the lack of art work impairsDearman'sconsistentlysolid use of archaeology.The historydemonstrates Dearman'sabilityto breakthrough standard interpretations,and, at the same time, the need for all of us to addressthe ramificationsof these ways of talking about the text and its times. ForDearian, religionand cultureare inseparable (3-8), yet his title and text often imply they are distinct.He emphasizes that the land had a formative influence on Israel'sdevelopment and that Genesis is its unique claim to that land
64
BiblicalArchaeologist 57:1 (1994)
(Wilson1977),yet he stilluses Buccellati's theory (1967)of Israelas a nation-state named for a people, and not a land. His archaeology clearly shows that the Hebrews' materialremains are indistinguishable from Canaanite remains (33), and that the Hebrews were not nomads or new inhabitants,but insiders in MB Syria-Palestinefrom which they emigrated in the wake of the turmoil which destroyed it (34). Yethe does not well explain why they described themselves as outsiders who crossed over (Hebrew: 'br).And finally,for Dearman,Israelwas not monotheistic,yet he does not dearly explain the distinctionsbetween Israel's denial of the existence of all gods except one (36), on the one hand, and, on the other, its worship of God of the Fathers (Alt 1968) as the El of particularsanctuariesin the land, and as the Yahwehwho promised to be (Hebrew:haya)Israel's divine patron (Hos 1:8-9;Exod 6:2-8). Dearman's six-part survey of Israel as a monarchy includes some provocative interpretationsof tell and text. For example, if the Kuntillet 'Ajrudinscriptions do not interpretthe drawings alongside them, then "Yahwehand the asherah"can be read like "Yahwehand the Temple"or "Yahwehand the ark of the covenant" (80-3).Asherah is architecture or artwork, not the godmother. And, although he does not pursue how it might influence readings of Ajalon (osh 10:12),Elijah(1 Kgs 17-21),Samson (Judg 13-15),and Ezekiel (Ezek 8:16), Dearmanrightlylaments that astronomy is a sorely understudiedaspect of Israel's culture (96). By combining the exilic and post-exilicperiods,Dearmanmakes the noteworthy assumption that neither the fall of Babylon to Cyrus in 537 BCE, nor the fall of Syria-Palestineto Alexander in 333 BCEhad as significant an impact on the religion and cultureof Israel as many histories of Israelpropose. But he unnecessarily limits his treatmentof the exile to three paragraphs (100) and is overly dependent on Hengel (1986)to describeIsrael'sHellenisticperiod (114). Religionand Culturein AncientIsrael provides many basicchanges to the standard classroom interpretationsof Israel and the Bible given today by archaeologists, anthropologists, and narrative
critics.The outcome is refreshing.This is not simply an update of the textbooks thathave servedus well. It is a new genre and a fine text for today'suniversityand seminary classrooms.
Bibliography
Alt,A.
1968 The God of the Fathers.Pp. 3-86in Essayson OldTestament Historyand Religion.GardenCity:Doubleday.
G. Buccellati,
1967 CitiesandNationsofAncientSyria. Studi Semitic26;Rome:University of Rome.
Hengel,M.
1974 JudaismandHellenism:Studiesin Their Encounterin PalestineduringtheEarly HellenisticPeriod.Philadelphia:
Fortress Press.
Wilson,R.R. andHistoryin theBiblical 1977 Genealogy World.New Haven:YaleUniversity.
DonC.Benjamin Rice University
.h--f-.g.st . .o.p.t.
e. Arh-
a
ntd
ttsbako Master~rd.
~. .
y
IAo
wit
Forsiaserice .
.
.
susrpn Topaeyour .
.
.
to8blk
Matrado P adretuit.to.Scholars.Press. -0)2 P$4;
234. Nn-U su0 $ Box 15399, GA3O333O0399. Atlanta, forpostage
Individuaf ordersrnustbe prepaid drawnon bycheckor mo~ney-order n States S $indiidual 35 a United bankor byVISA or Forfasterservicewith MasterCard. 0 $45US istittion MasterCard call(404)727orMVSA, 0 $40non-U indiidual 234..No.n.S .dd subscribers $5 for knonrS institutionsd postage. 0 $50 5 ntiuin onU 12 $35 USindividuals o $45 USinstitutions O $40 nonrUSindmvdtpars
F A11al0Pz z0
of
Schools
American
-
.
Oriental
Research
1993-9 4 BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Charles U. Harris, Chairmanof the Board Robert Johnston, Vice-Chairman Kevin G. O'Connell, Vice-Chairmanof the Board Eric M. Meyers, President R. Thomas Schaub, First Vice-President,Publications Walter Rast, Vice-President,CAP Donald Wimmer, Vice-President,Corporation W.H. Holden Gibbs, Vice-President,Finance, Treasurer Lydie T. Shufro, Vice-President,Public Relations Ernest Frerichs, Vice-President-at-Large George Landes, Secretary
Class of 1994
Class of 1995
Class of 1996
Betsy Cohen Lucie Gikovich Charles Harris Jeffrey Kurzweil George Landes P.E.MacAllister Peter Madigan
David Albright Paula Burger Jerry Cooper Max Miller Kevin O'Connell R. Thomas Schaub Gough T. Thompson
Ernest Frerichs W.H. Holden Gibbs Robert Johnston James Muhly Jonathan Rosen Richard Scheuer Lydie Shufro
Corporation Trustees
Honorary Trustees
Paul Y. Hoskisson Paul Jacobs Donald Wimmer
Alexander Abraham Frank Moore Cross Norma Kershaw Philip King C.C. Lamberg-Karlovsky Leon Levy Martin Meyerson John Warrington
Overseas Institutes and Committee Trustees Elizabeth Carter, Baghdad Giraud Foster, CAARI Michael Fuller, Damascus Artemis Joukowsky, ACOR Randolph B. Old, ACOR Andrew Oliver, CAARI Joe D. Seger, AIAR Joy Ungerleider-Mayerson, AIAR
Affiliate Institutional Trustees Holland Hendrix, SBL David I. Owen, AOS James Russell, AIA
Advisory Board Gus Van Beek Eugene Grant Alfred Gottschalk Eileen Guggenheim-Wilkinson Elizabeth Moynihan Lawrence Stager Shelby White
.:,
'• ,•
,
.
,.
,
r ? , ,; -,?•i•~ ??.:?: ?? ?? ??i?? ...? ,
5 .,-
,?••?•il?•
".
ii•!
i'ii'•••i•!!•
•ii • • iii• ?•• ~i•i.-"-. !•!i•ii i", i-••ii •!i..•-.••..• '-!!i• i•!.ii•i!i!! ....•.••.......-•....•.•.:•
i• • !. :••.•.••. .•...••• .: . i • !! •.-
?.. ?.?... •.i????! . .••.. ..??. iii?! .....••i.• ...•,.••z??• r.••...?.,•. ••...... `...•• .,?...?-...?..?? ?••••?: . .. ?• .. I:? :? -•?•?~:?• ?ii??~?: ,?,i ??... ? ...... ? ,!??:,ii:? ,?,•? ? : •, ? ,.? .• -?,, . ?.. . ?i? •?. ?ii ? ,?? •-. ? . .-,? ...?:.•••,i.• ..... .. . . ???•, . ??•• ?•
?
Statue of the child Baalshillem, son of Baana, king of Sidon. Photograph by permission of Dar el-Machreq Publishers.
